Sarah Palin has a bounty of expertise on Russia and Putin because Alaska is close to Russia.
She's a real foreign policy 'wonk.'
She's a real foreign policy 'wonk.'
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Republican VP Nom Palin thinks creationism should be taught in Schools
- Thread starter bigdavediode
- Start date
Quote from ByLoSellHi:
Sarah Palin has a bounty of expertise on Russia and Putin because Alaska is close to Russia.
She's a real foreign policy 'wonk.'
you know what bothers me about you fcking people ....
im not going to bother.
Just one question, Could you explain Obama's experience in these matters?
I was taught creationism in school. Outside america.
Thanks to a cowardly government, caving in to american demands, this was, bizarrely, presented as an idea, or alternative to evolution, and the many other theories put forward over time, and taught in science class, of all things.
None of these things got a lot of airtime in a public school anyway, but the fact that it was presented at all seemed, ostensibly, harmless, in a very secular society of people who take the time to think a little bit.
It made it all the more absurd, really, but the danger is the absolutism of the end goal.
These people would prefer, evolution not be in the curriculum, ultimately. Or science, chemistry, anything.
They would prefer a western style madrassa, where evolution, physics, chemistry, didn't exist.
That is a reality.
Even when i was a kid, primary school, it was still compulsory, to at least go on school excursion to a local church, if you refused, well-you couldn't , actually.
It was also compulsory, to attend the occasional-i think they laughably called it "religious studies", oddly enough, don't remember learning about islam, Buddhism, taoism, wiccan or anything else-goddidit christian rubbish.
On primary school kids, in a secular public school no less.
So, is teaching creationism a bad thing?
Ultimately, it depends what you mean by "teach".
Presenting ideas, and alternatives, and teaching kids to think for themselves, well why not, but trusting these god botherers to be even marginally "fair and balanced" in their approach would be a very grave mistake, given more than even marginal control.
Jm2c, as usual.
Thanks to a cowardly government, caving in to american demands, this was, bizarrely, presented as an idea, or alternative to evolution, and the many other theories put forward over time, and taught in science class, of all things.
None of these things got a lot of airtime in a public school anyway, but the fact that it was presented at all seemed, ostensibly, harmless, in a very secular society of people who take the time to think a little bit.
It made it all the more absurd, really, but the danger is the absolutism of the end goal.
These people would prefer, evolution not be in the curriculum, ultimately. Or science, chemistry, anything.
They would prefer a western style madrassa, where evolution, physics, chemistry, didn't exist.
That is a reality.
Even when i was a kid, primary school, it was still compulsory, to at least go on school excursion to a local church, if you refused, well-you couldn't , actually.
It was also compulsory, to attend the occasional-i think they laughably called it "religious studies", oddly enough, don't remember learning about islam, Buddhism, taoism, wiccan or anything else-goddidit christian rubbish.
On primary school kids, in a secular public school no less.
So, is teaching creationism a bad thing?
Ultimately, it depends what you mean by "teach".
Presenting ideas, and alternatives, and teaching kids to think for themselves, well why not, but trusting these god botherers to be even marginally "fair and balanced" in their approach would be a very grave mistake, given more than even marginal control.
Jm2c, as usual.
Quote from acronym:
I was taught creationism in school. Outside america.
Thanks to a cowardly government, caving in to american demands, this was, bizarrely, presented as an idea, or alternative to evolution, and the many other theories put forward over time, and taught in science class, of all things.
None of these things got a lot of airtime in a public school anyway, but the fact that it was presented at all seemed, ostensibly, harmless, in a very secular society of people who take the time to think a little bit.
It made it all the more absurd, really, but the danger is the absolutism of the end goal.
These people would prefer, evolution not be in the curriculum, ultimately. Or science, chemistry, anything.
They would prefer a western style madrassa, where evolution, physics, chemistry, didn't exist.
That is a reality.
Even when i was a kid, primary school, it was still compulsory, to at least go on school excursion to a local church, if you refused, well-you couldn't , actually.
It was also compulsory, to attend the occasional-i think they laughably called it "religious studies", oddly enough, don't remember learning about islam, Buddhism, taoism, wiccan or anything else-goddidit christian rubbish.
On primary school kids, in a secular public school no less.
So, is teaching creationism a bad thing?
Ultimately, it depends what you mean by "teach".
Presenting ideas, and alternatives, and teaching kids to think for themselves, well why not, but trusting these god botherers to be even marginally "fair and balanced" in their approach would be a very grave mistake, given more than even marginal control.
Jm2c, as usual.
the truly religious allow for literally all possiblilites.
it all boils down to GOOD vs EVIL...
All I'll say on this subject is ... on a personal basis.. YOU KNOW WHEN YOU'VE BEN EVILED AND YOU KNOW WHEN YOU'VE BEEN GOODED
absolute good and bad, is pretty obvious
Quote from pattersb2:
ANSWER THE FCKING QUESTION
At least he is on the senate Foreign Relations Committee.
In the end, you can say does it matters?
Bush has 4 years of president experience before he got re-elected. US's foreign policy result is what you see right now.
No matter what Palin or McCain said, they are republican and they will continue Bush's foreign policy.
If you like Bush's result, vote republican. If not, then the other one. It is that simple.
Quote from pattersb2:
the truly religious allow for literally all possiblilites.
it all boils down to GOOD vs EVIL...
All I'll say on this subject is ... on a personal basis.. YOU KNOW WHEN YOU'VE BEN EVILED AND YOU KNOW WHEN YOU'VE BEEN GOODED
absolute good and bad, utlimately is pretty clear
Hmm. Gooded? Eviled? Near as i can tell, jesus himself never used a lot of words like that.
To me, the bible is an appalling abrogation of his words, the grand total of his teachings run to what, a few pages?
Does it make me a fundamentalist, to believe that the few things he actually said that make sense, not re-interpreted by xyz gospels or additions, ie, flush the bible and its re-interpreted books,
are the sum total of his teachings?
I've seen evil you would not believe; things any gnostic/atheist would call evil.
Ironically, your type would regard my experience as satanic, or evil-my own grandmother called me the devil, and she wasn't even religious, as such.
I couldn't stop them, i could do nothing to help those people- does that make me evil?
I saved a few from an even worse fate, but turns out i might have well not bothered.
Or christ like, that i actually tried, re; jesus helping a prostitute, viciously stoned by theocratic elders.
Hey, i have been eviled alright, but largely by the very same slimebags who proclaim holiness and goodness.
Quote from pattersb2:
the truly religious allow for literally all possiblilites.
it all boils down to GOOD vs EVIL...
All I'll say on this subject is ... on a personal basis.. YOU KNOW WHEN YOU'VE BEN EVILED AND YOU KNOW WHEN YOU'VE BEEN GOODED
absolute good and bad, is pretty obvious
how can your god, the biggest mass murderer of all time, time be considered good?