Court rejects 'intelligent design' in class

[Schizo]

Several members repeatedly lied to cover their motives even while professing religious beliefs...

Said the judge: "It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy."

 

[slotted]

ID has no place being taught as science. On the other hand, I have no problem with ID being taught, only it belongs in a philosophy class.

 

[Schizo]

ID has no place being taught as science. On the other hand, I have no problem with ID being taught, only it belongs in a philosophy class.

I totally agree. People need to keep an open mind on all ideas.

 

[aps45819]

I always thought natural selection was one hell of an intellegent design.

 

[Bustem' Down]

I have to agree with slotted on this one. ID is not a science and shouldn't be taught there. Philosophy seems to be the best place to put it. Can ya'll think of a better place?

 

[donbarzini]

I have to agree with slotted on this one. ID is not a science and shouldn't be taught there. Philosophy seems to be the best place to put it. Can ya'll think of a better place?

How about the home?

 

[SAHRAB]

ID has no place being taught as science. On the other hand, I have no problem with ID being taught, only it belongs in a philosophy class.

I was of the mind, that i didnt mind ID being taught along with Evolution, as long as both are labeled Theories. Not because of any religious aspect (because i'm not) but because it is another "idea"

but i like your idea better

 

[Ponytail]

I just read this article. I'm SO happy to see the school Board was "outted" as being manipulative liars out for no other gain than their own religious cause, and effectively forcing religion on the entire shool.

Finally, it seems there are some smarts in a lower court.

 

[calvertcrazy]

I think it should be taught/offered, no opinion as to what part of the curriculum. I don't think evolution or ID should be forced on students as fact.

 

[SAHRAB]

I think it should be taught/offered, no opinion as to what part of the curriculum. I don't think evolution or ID should be forced on students as fact.

Thats kinda what i was trying to say in my inarticulate way

 

[vraiblonde]

I always thought natural selection was one hell of an intellegent design.

 

[Ponytail]

Careful, you might get red for that.

drivers are gaining in numbers here.

 

[daisy]

I think both should be taught, I'm a christian, I believe in Intelligent Design, and I have NO ALTERIOR MOTIVES for wanting that to be taught. I don't want it taught as some sort of a revival or evangelical thing. As a christian, I don't feel threatened by the teaching of evolution, I don't feel like my rights are being violated, as long as its not taught as the absolute and only truth. Especially since it HAS NOT been proven as that. Science is full of theories and things of the sort, and BOTH of these are theories. This isn't teaching Bible or even religious principles, its just an idea or theory.

Here is something to ponder...

If you do not want the theory of intelligent design, the idea that we are created by a greater being, "imposed" upon your children, what makes you think that I want the theory of evolution "imposed" upon my children? This theory that says the God that we do believe in does not have anything to do with their creation. Mind you I can answer the questions that they'll come home with, and settle their confusion based on our beliefs, and I'd be willing to bet most non-christian parents can do the same. Teach them both, there's nothing to be afraid of!

 

[Ponytail]

It's public school, funded by my tax dollars. Separation of church and state.

You want something other than fact taught to your kids, home school or go to private school. It's that simple.

 

[daisy]

...meanwhile, the "fact" that isn't yet proven is taught in the schools that MY tax dollars pay for also (whether my children attend or not)...which is why I have no problem with BOTH being taught. I'm not asking the school to shove my religion down your children's throat, or even acknowledge that it is a religion, just teach that evolution is NOT the only THOERY being explored. I think that the people who are so threatened by one side OR the other bring thaught are the ones who should be homeschooling their children.

 

[RoseRed]

Bug and I went to my Mom's this afternoon and Bug caught sight of the Nativity Scene right off. So I asked her what it was about and she explained it, I thought, good for her! Mom got all teary eyed because it is the same one that she had when I was a kid. Mom was disappointed because she wanted to teach it to her since she "failed" with me.

I don't believe, but I have no problem with my daughter going to Sunday school and learning. I just dread the day she starts asking me questions...

 

[Lenny]

It's public school, funded by my tax dollars. Separation of church and state.

You want something other than fact taught to your kids, home school or go to private school. It's that simple.

Isn't it amazing that the liberals can ascribe intelligence capable of developing intelligent design to only one power and that is God! Years ago if someone talked about an alien intelligence planting humanity on the earth, everyone would immediately think of martians. It appears God is making a comeback based on the "sky is falling" liberals' response to this tiny idea. Yeah, God!!!

 

[Ponytail]

...meanwhile, the "fact" that isn't yet proven is taught in the schools that MY tax dollars pay for also (whether my children attend or not)...which is why I have no problem with BOTH being taught. I'm not asking the school to shove my religion down your children's throat, or even acknowledge that it is a religion, just teach that evolution is NOT the only THOERY being explored. I think that the people who are so threatened by one side OR the other bring thaught are the ones who should be homeschooling their children.

What I remember being taught in school was only what is KNOWN and proven by science. Yes, there was theory, scientific theory. There is a difference. But it was also understood that what wasn't yet proven was simply theory. Science classes NEVER will teach that the bible or any other religion is wrong, or false, or anything else. It wasn't even mentioned.

A book that has been re-written and transcribed and is left up to interpretation has no business being taught in SCIENCE class. It's not science.

Yes both need to be taught. I have no problem with that. But ya know, in church, I'll never hear about Darwins Theory of Evolution or the big bang theory, or about the ancient skeletons found in archeological digs over the years showing the evolution of man, so why bring the bible into science class?

 

[bcp]

It's public school, funded by my tax dollars. Separation of church and state.

funded by my tax dollar also. Do I get a say in this matter?
as far as seperation of church and state, the reason that the founding fathers put that in, was simply to keep the government from forcing someone to follow one religion. It was because of the forced catholic religion in England .
the clause was not added to prevent anyone from teaching or speaking about religion. That did not happen until years later after the formation of the Anti Christian Lawyers Union.

You want something other than fact taught to your kids, home school or go to private school. It's that simple.

science has been revised much more than religion.
I would think that religion has a better track record.

 

[vraiblonde]

I would think that religion has a better track record.

Actually, it doesn't when you consider all the different religions there are

Science class is for science. Religion is not a science, so no religion in science class. Simple.