NDP
Even though you made a double posting, that was a story that had to be told. Man that guy is scary. I like his quote about college grads going out into the real world.
It’s easy to call the military baby-killers when you’re hanging out with a bunch of your buddies of like mind. But it’s a little different when you’re working next to ol’ John who happens to be a Vietnam Vet.
Yeah and didn’t he rip the shit out of Kerry during the 2004 election and he supported a chickenshit draft-dodging commander in chief. Yeah Charlie keep spreading the shit high and deep !!! :mad:
Can I ask why the fuck you’re even hanging around here if you don’t think knowledge has a value of its own? A great number of things taught in schools don’t do any of what you mention, but they’re considered valuable because learning itself is worthwhile, and it stimulates curiosity about the world and self-expression.
The trouble with that is, if enough people start to believe crap, they have the power base to put that crap into mainstream education or maybe even the legal system itself. You’re not residing in Libertaria just yet, so you might want to back off on the “If I can’t have it my way, you’d better be ready to kill me” puffery. Now, some parents may wish that their children learn no more then they themselves have learned, but I still believe that most parents want their kids to turn out even better than themselves, and the only real way that can happen is for our children to question and learn. I grew up knowing what my parents opinions were, and what they thought the “facts” were. If I the public school I went to taught just what my father wanted them to teach, I’d be an ignorant no-class bigot with a useless 5th grade education living in a broken down trailer in Northern Idaho.
Understanding biology is important for a lot of public policy decisions that citizens will have to make, or at least influence. (What are the dangers of genetically engineered foods, or the risks of using genetic engineering in medicine? What sort of policies should we adopt on environmental issues? How concerned should we be about the ecological results of possible global climate change?) Citizens serving on juries have a civic duty to consider evidence which these days is often rooted in the biological sciences. (Is that prosecutor trying to snow you with all that talk about the DNA evidence, or is it the defense attorney who’s trying to snow you with all his talk about the DNA evidence?) Personal health decisions are governed by a knowledge of biology. (Why does it matter what your grandfather died of? Who cares if everyone takes antibiotics for viral infections–it may not help, but it can’t hurt, right?)
If by “origin theory” you’re referring strictly to theories of abiogenesis, then the loss to students who aren’t planning on becoming professional biologists of not studying that one still fairly hypothetical field of science might not be that great. But the Christian fundamentalist “creationist” movement wants to completely gut students’ understanding of the whole of biology, not to mention geology and a large part of astronomy and cosmology as well.
Biology is one of the principal branches of science, one of the most important branches of science from a practical standpoint, since part of its field of study is ourselves, and educated free men and women should not be ignorant of it. People who are ignorant of evolutionary science are ignorant of biology.
You have generalized my words to implications that I neither made nor intended, and if you’re honest, you’ll retract the accusation.
Sure, there are many ideas and subjects like that. Do we teach all of them, or even close to all of them? No. We consciously decide it’s an important public service to teach some types of knowledge, and others are left to the domains of extracurricular or post-secondary education. The area of elective education is where teaching of origin theory belongs, along with things like the pledge of allegiance and organized prayer (while we’re talking about things inappropriate for public schools).
You’ve made 2 major errors here… first, you’ve conflated biology with evolution… they are related, but not the same. Second, there are a number of physicians and scientists who do not buy into nontheist origin theory… if you presume to call them ignorant in their fields, I hope you possess equal or greater credentials on the subject. Do you?
Is it? I’m just wondering how far you go with this idea. Because it seem to me you’re touting the sovereign right of the individual…at the risk of making children into property. Children are not the property of their parents, just as much as they are not the property of the State. They are also sovereign individuals (even if they are not yet fit to reign on there own yet). So is it really no-one elses business if the parents decide to teach their kid astrology instead of evolution? Yes? Well, is it ok if they decide they don’t need to learn to read and write? How 'bout if the decide they don’t need to leave the house. Ever. What if they think it’s in the child’s best interest to be raised inside a Skinner Box*?
Personally, I agree with Marley - I have to share the planet with them, so I believe in something like sociatial interest. You may disagree. But honestly, unless you’re ok with parents raising their kids in a dark room in the basement, you have to admit it is more complicated that “It’s none of you’re business.”
*Which, for the sake of accuracy, B.F. Skinner DID NOT do. Just using it as and example.
Really? I never hear him unless the radio plays The Devil went down to Georgia. The guys a nut case with weird ideas not unlike some of the leftwingnuts in Hollywood.
I’m not sure what your persistent references to “nontheist origin theory” are supposed to indicate. I would oppose any teaching of abiogenesis as a fact, since we do not yet have even a prominent working hypothesis that clearly appears better than any other speculation on the topic. On the other hand, the Theory of Natural Selection (or Evolution in shorthand), which is separate from abiogenesis, is quite firmly established as the agency for descent and modification through history after life appeared–however life appeared.
And Evolution is not opposed by any real number of “physicians and scientists” who are actually studying that area of biology. There are a very few cranks in the field who oppose the Theory of Evolution, carefully refusing to publish their criticisms in peer reviewed journals. There is a somewhat larger number of people with PhDs following their names who are not involved in that research, who have been inveigled to sign meaningless papers claiming that they, personally, do not happen to believe that Evolution has occurred. (Even people who want to inject God into the discussion, (e.g., Michael Behe), often admit that Evolution works as described; they simply want to throw God into the equation whenever they run into a stumbling block that they, personally, have not overcome.)
I guess a lot of people are then tree hugging pot smoking baby eaters, because they were in the military at one time (or still are) and also went to college (some even do both simultaneously). Seems like Charlie may just be your typical shit talking punk (maybe? rofl). So now he is a great patriot cuz some guy named “John” supposedly worked next to him. As what? As a grossly underpaid roady? Last election, he and his other chickenhawk buddies tried to rip the shit out of a real vet coincidentally named John.
Yes, I’m “touting” the sovereign rights of individuals, but children are individuals as much as parents are. Children are entitled to the same protections against initial force and deception as anyone else, including from their parents. But the consenting parties in a parents-children relation are the parents, not the children. There are billions of people who might be the primary decision makers on behalf of children — everyone from Wolf_meister to a politburo committee. All I’m saying is that first dibs goes to the parents. If they decide to educate their children in farming, or science, or astrology, or religion, or all of these — it is none of our business. This is not a question of whether parents may subject their children to sensory depravation in solitary rooms without light; it is a question of whether parents may decide how to educate their children. And the funny thing is that your position is no different than that of the very people whom you are ridiculing. They too want to decide how to educate your children, and you are rightfully enraged about it. Like you, they think you are ruining your childrens’ lives with the decisions you make. Meanwhile, the children are caught in a tug of war between meddling do-gooders, each of which thinks the other is the incarnation of evil. I know exactly how I want my children educated, and that is exactly how I educated my child. I made certain that she recognized the both of you for what you are — a danger to her.
Interesting that you brought up farming, Lib. Farming, and breeding for specific desired traits is evolution. Nature evolves animals and plants to fit into specific niches (survivablilty, better hunter, more disease resistant, more prolific breeder, etc.). Farming and selective breeding evolves animals for specific desired traits too - more milk, more bulk/meat, more eggs etc. One is slower and controlled by climate, food available, survival of those with “better” traits such as size or strength or speed, etc. The other is faster and is controlled by the farmer. Any time you breed for a desired outcome, you are causing an evolution. Science. Farming. Evolution. Funny how “country people” can deny evolution, when they USE it every day on their own farm.
The education system, any education system, is supposed to replace ignorance with knowledge. It is supposed to expose people to ideas. It is not supposed to “shield” them from ideas or independent thought, or foster and enforce ignorance. If anything, they are learning how to separate the good from the stupid only by being exposed to both. Then they know enough to make up their own minds. The Sovereign Individual has a right to remain ignorant I suppose. However, when he/she wants to foist that ignorance on another Sovereign Individual, something is wrong. If I had kids, I would not want them “learning” about flat earth, 6000 year earth, Jesus horses, ID, or any other such thing. I sure wouldn’t want the ignorant Charlies of the world deciding what is allowed in “my” school or any other school.
Now where did I say I was people and that Creationist parents are not? It is the collective business of all the people in a democracy to ensure that the next generation receive an education adequate to ensure the health of the nation.