Nonsense elucidator. Poppycock and twaddle. Diogenes holds forth his opinion as the final word, his analysis as definitive, on numerous topics including those he knows jack shit about. IIRC there have been no less than three seperate pit threads which ran to six or more pages where people had to beat him about the head and shoulders with evidence and reasoning before he would back down from his stance. If that isn’t self-righteousness then nothing is.
I’ve no interest in arguing with two such verbose gentleman as yourself and Dio at the same time, so I’ll leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine if the humble moniker change I’ve suggested would be fair or not.
Let’s take it a step further. Just for shits and giggles.
If you really want the Children[sup]TM[/sup] to learn stuff that may actually be beneficial to them, by all means learn 'em what you want. Let’s also teach them how to fire a 30.06 so they may garner a meal for thier family. Really, from some of your posts, it seems that we’re all doomed. When the shit hits the fan, we’re on our own. Halliburton will increase the price of oil to the point that fuel costs will prohibit trucks delivering meat to markets. We’re all on our own. (Though you’re invited to the cabin. I want to see insanity up close)
How will the Children[sup]TM[/sup] ever cope? By going out and shooting dinner. Like our grandfathers did in a time of need. Why deny the knowledge of feeding a family in the certain shitstorm the world faces with another 3 years of Bush?
Here’s the issue. You, Diogenes the Cynic(as you call yourself on this board) do not get to define what constitutes a “decent education”. Nor do you have the authority to declare your definition as binding via the 14th amendment. You don’t get to define what counts as “inattentive driving” or the value of a person’s virginity, or the amount of deference which should be given to someone with an unfortunate, severe allergy. You don’t have the authority. None of us do.
When did I call you an asshole? I’ve called you self-righteous. I think demonizing those with a different idea of what constitutes a “decent education” than you and saying the state should step in fits the bill. Belittling those whose virginity is important to them? Another check. Declaring your intent to deliberately flaunt a rule designed to safeguard a student’s life because you feel it is not sufficiently justified. Big time self-righteousness there, and the subject of one of your six-page pit threads IIRC. You disagree with the school’s administrators so you’ll deliberately defy them. Sure the kid could die, but what the fuck is that when set against the principle of imposing restrictions on Diogenes that he doesn’t agree with?
The problems is, you are trying to equate knowledge of evolution with the ability to read. **Requiring **that kids be taught evolution makes as much sense as **requiring **that they be taught Quantum Mechanics.
Evolution is undeniably a critical part of Biology, but it’s just **one **aspect of **one **science. Is Biology even a reqirement in high school in most states? It’s been awhile for me, but IIRC, it was an elective like chemistry or physics. Some people took it, some didn’t. If there was a req’t to take one year of science, most kids took Biology because it was the easiest, but any of the others would have met the requirement.
Do you think all these creationists (some 50% of the population who don’t “believe” in evolution) were all homeschooled by religious fundamentalists?
Frankly, I’m all for beefing up the US school curiculum. Evolution would certainly be on the list of things to beef it up with, but it’d be pretty far down on the list. There are much bigger holes in eductation than a lack of an understanding of evolution.
I’ll fight tooth and nail against the teaching of creationism in public schools. But if a homeschool curriculum is weak on evolution (or doesn’t address it all), BFD. The most you can do, as I said above, is test for it as part of some overall education req’t, but it’d be 1 or 2 questions out of 100. Wouldn’t make a lick of difference.
Why not? It’s not even really an “opinion” to say that an education cannot be sufficient without some sort of basic understanding of biology, and biology can’t be understood without understanding evolution. There is no difference between saying that a kid has a right to learn how to read (something I doubt you’d disagree with) and saying a kid has a right to learn about evolution. They are equally important parts of an education suffient to merit any kind of accredited high school diploma or GED, and equally important to make a student eligible for college. This is not a controversial view, nor is it something I’ve come up with on my own. Do YOU believe that a basic education can be complete without a knowledge of evolution?
Nor do I REQUIRE any “authority” to interpret the 14th Aamendment and form an opinion about it.
[quoet]You don’t get to define what counts as “inattentive driving” or the value of a person’s virginity, or the amount of deference which should be given to someone with an unfortunate, severe allergy. You don’t have the authority. None of us do.
[/quote]
I don’t have the right to express personal opinions? Am I in the right country? I thought I was in America. I’m almost positive I’ve see other people express opinions on this board. Have I been dreaming for the past three years? The thread that led to thos ome was in a forum called IMHO. What does that stand for?
Am I supposed to preface every personal opinion I post with “IMO” or “I think…?” Fuck that.
Same difference.
I don’t know when I’ve “demonized” them. Maybe I’ve called parents who refuse to expose their kids to science “morons” or something, but that’s just stating an obvious truth, and it is a FACT, not an opinion, that evolution is a necessary part of education. Only a complete fucking imbecile would deny that.
When do YOU believe the state should step in, by the way? Do you believe a child has any legal right whatsoever to be educated? Do parents have the right to refuse to teach their kids how to read, yes or no?
That’s not self-righteous, just mocking and disrespectful.
It took me a while to figure out what you were talking about with this. It was that dumbass peanut butter thread, wasn’t it? I said I’d ignore a school rule about letting my kid bring peanut butter to school. Well, I don’t feel like looking it up, but from what I remember, saying that it would endanger another kid’s life is rather a stretch. And wasn’t that like two years ago? You’ve got a memory like an elephant, dude.
Mace, I’m not saying that a curriculum on evolution needs to be particularly comprehensive or detailed. I just think there has to be some sort of very basic explanation of what it means. When it comes to the Theory of Evolution, an awful lot of people literally do not even know the definitions of the words “theory” and “evolution.” All I expect is that any kid who expects to be granted any sort of accredited diploma or certificate should at least know what the theory is and what it isn’t. I don’t say they have to believe it and I don’t say their arents should not be allowed to teach them creationism. But if they think that evolution is a theory about how the universe was formed then they are showing a deficiency in their education at least equivalent to not being able to name the century of World War 2 or thinking that the Capital of the United States is Idaho.
Absolutely. For every loudmouth blowhard who has an opinion there are millions that couldn’t care less. The necessity of teaching Evolution/Creationism is overrated. Does knowing how we got here pay the bills? If you’re some lobbyist it does. Otherwise it’s something to go a few rounds over when you have nothing else to do.
None. School should be for basic literacy and skill training. Anything above and beyond that should be on you. I’ve said that for a long time, at least since the question was posed in one of the Political Compass threads.
Besides, ask yourself what kids get out of school now. For all the money we throw at schools, for all the resources they consume, can you honestly say that you get your money’s worth? Not hardly. You get a combination social club and babysitter. You can get that for a lot less out in the private sector, and a much better education to boot. I did nearly 11 years of private school, transferring to a public school for the last 2 1/2 years. When I walked into the classroom that first day I was astonished at what they were teaching. They were light years behind what I had learned in private school and I wasn’t even in any advanced classes at my previous institution. It was a joke.
If it is at all possible I will be sending my son to a private school. If that means that he learns about Creationism, that’s fine with me. Why? Because it doesn’t matter.
I won’t “cheat” my son out of an education, and I will aim to get him the best one, but only because people seem to think that a degree means something other than the ability to stay awake for 12-16 years and that some schools are more valuable than others. If I were allowed to leave it up to him I would. Truth is, I’ve learned more from reading on my own and from living real life than I ever did from school.
Dude, read the fucking thread. Diogenes states boldly that American bombing raids were done specifically to kill civilians. Ergo, the entire American war effort was evil.
I can read thanks. How about you try thinking? I know it’s hard, what with that knee constantly jerking into your face and all, but give it a go. Begin by figuring out when you can and cannot use the term ‘ergo’. Then try using ‘therefore’ so as not to sound like a pretentious twat. Here’s a fucking hint. It has no place in the quote above.
What’s the matter with using the word ‘ergo’? It’s a perfectly appropriate and useful word, and was used correctly in the sentence. Did you understand what he meant? Obviously so,since you offered another word that you felt he should have used. In that case, the goal of communication of an idea was met.
I agree 100% with that. Not even a quibble of disagreement. But if you are going to assert (as you seem to have done) that the above is **mandated **by the 14th amendment, then I’m going to adamantlly disagree, and ask you to back up that statement with facts (ie, SCOTUS rulings, not just your own intereptation of what that amendment means).
