kabbes: Yes, it is really not an issue anywhere else in the world except a little in Canada and Australia. Unfortunately, the U.S. is the main focal point for this particular kind of bullshit.
Sorry to reply to my own point, but in retrospect this probably wouldn’t be an issue for us anyway, 'cos we don’t have an equivalent to SOCAS. This means that our schools have Religious Studies classes (learning about ALL types of religion normally). Creation as a belief would be taught in this class as part of a wider curriculum.
Interesting - maybe SOCAS ends up biting the hand that feeds it on this one? With no natural dumping ground for teaching about religious beliefs, you end up tying yourselves in knots over issues that would otherwise be straightforward?
OTOH at least you don’t have to put up with prayers and hymns in your school assemblies :rolleyes:
pan
Well, actually, since the schools now have the freedom to teach evolution as they see fit, it would open that they could teach Creation as they saw fit. It would be a matter of individual choice of the teacher. The only alternative would be to put a version of Creation in the text books as a scientific theory, which I think everyone has agreed, it is not a scientific theory. Which is why, I liked the compromise that I thought David B. and Scylla had reached. Address it, but don’t teach it with the reason why it isn’t taught. It is almost like qualifying Evolution, but the degree in which it is qualified would vary from teacher to teacher. I don’t know for certain, but that is probably what is happening now.
My God, I’ve been converted by the spawn of Satan himself 
(j/k)
Palm Cove… I think you will find that the majority population of this country believes in Christianity and the Bible. Displaying his Christianity through his views to the voters who are mostly Christian is certainly not ignorance. It may go against atheistism or Evolutionism or even science, but it is not ignorance. You can argue that it is a stupid tactic, anti-SOCAS, religious right, but it does not make him ignorant.
He has not said he is in favor of violating SOCAS.
I can say “nobody should have an abortion,” and still be pro-choice.
Bush has stated an opinion. He has not stated the intent to act upon it, or even particularly clarified the opinion. Is is subject to interpretation. You may put the worst possible face on it, but that doesn’t make it correct.
What the article seems to indicate, and a far likelier possibility, is that Bush is ignorant of the levels of proof achieved in evolutionary theory, and the levels of deceit used in the promulgation of creationism. I think his advisors have basically told him to “Shut up” on this issue, and I think it’s extremely unlikely that he will take any action on this opinion.
Justanotherguy:
It’s not a compromise. It’s the way it should be handled. It’s not what Bush’s opinion points to though, which is why it was a hijack.
I’ve never come across it here in Oz. I’ve had a look at quite a lot of the CvE threads here at SDMB and at PP and have been quite amazed by what I have seen.
That there are creationists who post on a board dedicated to fighting ignorance seems strangely weird to me. They appear to be fighting for ignorance.
It seems not a week goes by without new evidence supporting evolution appearing. It isn’t always phrased in terms of CvE, that’s no longer relevant. It is often evidence relating to species development or evolutionary influences on behavior, much more interesting stuff.
I am really glad we don’t have the “fundie” problem that you guys have. That there are so many of them that politicians have to take them into consideration is a frightening scenario.
of course, SD’ers realize that the Theory of Evolution has nothing to do with the creation of the Earth.
JustAnotherGuy:
Well, they teach how the school boards, the county, and the state see fit. States generally mandate curricula, not individual schools.
Yes, but I think you will also find that the majority in this country does not believe that the “verdict is still out” on evolution.
Gaudere:
huh. That’s all well and good, but I’ll continue to fight against heresy and teach my kids how things really happened. In my house, we respect Marduk, and don’t you forget it, missy.
Marduk? Isn’t that the big dog in the comic strip?
That is your God?
Marduk is as nothing compared to Fred of The Multiverse! He has the power of selective perception across the infinite worlds of the multiverse! Salma Hayek is his sex slave! He can order pizza without picking up the phone!
Cast away your pathetic deity-mutt, and bow down before the omnipotence (well, pretty powerful,) of Fred!
That’s Marmaduke, Scylla. Marduk is the supreme god of the Babylonian pantheon, you godsless tool of Tiamat, you.
Woosh!
Depressingly enough, that second statement may not be true, or at best it may be barely true. Gallup polls show that 47% of the American public believe that “God created human beings at one time within the last 10,000 years pretty much in their present form”, while 49% accept evolution in either theistic (40%) or atheistic (9%) form. (I suppose the remaining 4% favor Scientific Marduk-Battles-It-Out-With-Tiamatism.) Americans favor teaching creationism alongside evolution 68% to 29%. Only 28% believe evolution should be required, while 49% think it should be an elective. 25% think creationism should be required, while 56% say it should be an elective. 21% would ban evolution from the classroom, while only 16% would ban creationism. That a majority of Americans favor “equal time” indicates that they may in fact think that “the verdict is still out”, while nearly half the American public are creationists, and presumably think the “verdict” on evolution is “guilty”.
MEBuckner, it’s statistics like that that make me glad for antimajoritarian institutions like the Supremes.
Oh. My. God. (NPI)
I can’t believe those statistics you just posted, MEBuckner.
Sheesh, I remember growing up that I didn’t meet anyone who thought Adam and Eve was anything but a fairy tale except for the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Not until I reached adulthood did I start running into them in numbers, and even now I can’t say that I’ve met anything close to those numbers in that proportion. Mostly they divide into two distinct groups: the above-named Jehovah’s Witnesses, and some Orthodox Jews. Occasionally, I’ve met a fundamentalist Christian who believed this stuff, but I’ve always wondered, because I hear so much about them, and they at least seem to be all over this message board…
Where in heaven’s name are these people?
I think it’s normally spelled “whoosh”…
I’m definitely profoundly grateful for the First Amendment.
I have seen suggestions that George Gallup (who is evidently a fairly active evangelical Christian) may not be entirely objective when it comes to religious matters. (For example, see Survey Inflating Claims of Christian Radio Audiences? on the American Atheists website.) Of course, merely pointing out that someone is himself religious is not the same thing as demonstrating any actual problem with a particular poll he’s run.
There’s a large ovelap between the Bible Belt and the Sun Belt, which has been the fastest growing part of the country for the past several decades now.
MEbuckener:
I stand corrected. (gotta admit that I’m a little peeved that you thought I was really confused between Marmaduke, and Marduk though.)
Well, you never know. This country is in desperate danger of losing its priceless Marduk-fearing heritage to those un-American gods-hating monotheistical commies–I tell you, this country was founded on belief in Marduk, but you try teaching kids the simple truth about their heritage in a public school, and you get slapped with a lawsuit from those Tiamat-loving ACLU lawyers…
I hate him.
I hate him.
(that was pretty good)
Scylla said:
I’m sorry, but bullshit.
He is in favor of having public schools teach creationism in science class.
And that’s just on this one issue. We could go to town with a number of others. Do you really wonder what his stance is on posting the 10 Commandments at schools and government offices? Or how about prayer in school? Do you think it’s a coincidence that he’s supported by the Religious Right?
Arguably Bush’s stand on SOCAS per se is irrelevant. He will undoubtedly try to appoint judges who are pro-states’ rights, who will in turn support the “right” of local school boards to teach creationism. If Bush wins- and I suspect he will- I fully expect serious repercussions with regard to C/E. Alabama has a “disclaimer” in its textbooks today. What tomorrow?
-Ben