|
Stupid is as stupid does...
When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she
might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the “creation point of view.” http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons… The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
a source of fictional material. Finally getting around to writing your autobiography? -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the “creation point of view.” http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons… The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the “creation point of view.” http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons… The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the “creation point of view.” http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons… The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/3/15 10:25 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the “creation point of view.” http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons… The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? No. There is nothing but "faith" underpinning creationism. It is nothing more than superstition. It's the misunderstanding of the word "theory" in "theory of evolution" that confuses people. It's not a theory in the commonly accepted meaning of that word. Evolution is a fact. Creationism is based upon non-factual, non-provable religious belief. The teaching of religious beliefs as "historical" or "factual" has no place in the public schools. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
|
Stupid is as stupid does...
|
Stupid is as stupid does...
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 09:31:59 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the creation point of view. http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. You were expecting the truth? -- Guns don't cause problems. Gun owner behavior causes problems. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/3/15 1:30 PM, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 09:31:59 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the creation point of view. http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. You were expecting the truth? From the proponents of creationism? Don't be silly. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 13:31:46 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 6/3/15 1:30 PM, John H. wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 09:31:59 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the creation point of view. http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. You were expecting the truth? From the proponents of creationism? Don't be silly. From Harry Krause even more silly. -- Guns don't cause problems. Gun owner behavior causes problems. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the “creation point of view.” http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons… The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Were you born arrogant and ignorant or did you have to work at it? -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/3/2015 1:30 PM, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 09:31:59 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the creation point of view. http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. You were expecting the truth? Krauseberger hasn't a clue what the truth is. -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the creation point of view. http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 12:03:27 -0400, Keyser Sze
wrote: On 6/3/15 11:50 AM, wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 11:32:44 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 11:28 AM, wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? There is plenty of political spin in the "approved" text books and there are really only a couple of companies providing most of the K12 books. Pushing religious beliefs in the public schools in unConstitutional. Yet pushing political ideology is perfectly legal. What is wrong with this picture? Well, an awfully large percentage of textbooks are published by conservatively based organizations in dum**** states like Texas, where right-wing political influences are rampant. What is wrong with that picture? Once again, pushing religious beliefs in the public schools is unlawful. Spot on. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote:
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the creation point of view. http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/4/2015 3:20 PM, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the creation point of view. http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. None of that matters to those who have faith. You seem to have a hard time understanding that. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/4/15 3:25 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/4/2015 3:20 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the creation point of view. http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. None of that matters to those who have faith. You seem to have a hard time understanding that. The problem arises not because of their faith, but because they try to push their religious beliefs on those who believe differently or not at all. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:25:51 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 6/4/2015 3:20 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the creation point of view. http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. None of that matters to those who have faith. You seem to have a hard time understanding that. The same "faith" they try to shove down the throats of others. As if their version has any more validity than the Mormons or the Scientologists, just because they're ancient. If there were a god, the Duggars would have been rendered impotent. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/4/2015 4:09 PM, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 6/4/15 3:25 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/4/2015 3:20 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the creation point of view. http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. None of that matters to those who have faith. You seem to have a hard time understanding that. The problem arises not because of their faith, but because they try to push their religious beliefs on those who believe differently or not at all. Sounds like a familiar theme around here. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/4/2015 4:54 PM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:25:51 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 3:20 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the creation point of view. http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. None of that matters to those who have faith. You seem to have a hard time understanding that. The same "faith" they try to shove down the throats of others. As if their version has any more validity than the Mormons or the Scientologists, just because they're ancient. If there were a god, the Duggars would have been rendered impotent. I have people calling me or emailing me just about every day trying to shove something down my throat. Could be a car dealership, Direct TV, or one of a hundred other marketeers of services. products or fund raisers. I am a big boy. I know how to say no. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 17:58:07 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 6/4/2015 4:54 PM, jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:25:51 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 3:20 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the creation point of view. http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. None of that matters to those who have faith. You seem to have a hard time understanding that. The same "faith" they try to shove down the throats of others. As if their version has any more validity than the Mormons or the Scientologists, just because they're ancient. If there were a god, the Duggars would have been rendered impotent. I have people calling me or emailing me just about every day trying to shove something down my throat. Could be a car dealership, Direct TV, or one of a hundred other marketeers of services. products or fund raisers. I am a big boy. I know how to say no. They're not threatening you with eternal hell. The sales schtick may seem similar but the cost will hardly be the same. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
jps wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 17:58:07 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 4:54 PM, jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:25:51 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 3:20 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the creation point of view. http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. None of that matters to those who have faith. You seem to have a hard time understanding that. The same "faith" they try to shove down the throats of others. As if their version has any more validity than the Mormons or the Scientologists, just because they're ancient. If there were a god, the Duggars would have been rendered impotent. I have people calling me or emailing me just about every day trying to shove something down my throat. Could be a car dealership, Direct TV, or one of a hundred other marketeers of services. products or fund raisers. I am a big boy. I know how to say no. They're not threatening you with eternal hell. The sales schtick may seem similar but the cost will hardly be the same. The sales folks are not passing laws to restrict your rights as a citizen. The fundie Christians and their enablers are. -- Sent from my iPhone 6+ |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 4 Jun 2015 22:10:59 GMT, Keyser Sze wrote:
jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 17:58:07 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 4:54 PM, jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:25:51 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 3:20 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the ?creation point of view.? http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons? The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. None of that matters to those who have faith. You seem to have a hard time understanding that. The same "faith" they try to shove down the throats of others. As if their version has any more validity than the Mormons or the Scientologists, just because they're ancient. If there were a god, the Duggars would have been rendered impotent. I have people calling me or emailing me just about every day trying to shove something down my throat. Could be a car dealership, Direct TV, or one of a hundred other marketeers of services. products or fund raisers. I am a big boy. I know how to say no. They're not threatening you with eternal hell. The sales schtick may seem similar but the cost will hardly be the same. The sales folks are not passing laws to restrict your rights as a citizen. The fundie Christians and their enablers are. Good point. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/4/2015 6:06 PM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 17:58:07 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 4:54 PM, jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:25:51 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 3:20 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the creation point of view. http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. None of that matters to those who have faith. You seem to have a hard time understanding that. The same "faith" they try to shove down the throats of others. As if their version has any more validity than the Mormons or the Scientologists, just because they're ancient. If there were a god, the Duggars would have been rendered impotent. I have people calling me or emailing me just about every day trying to shove something down my throat. Could be a car dealership, Direct TV, or one of a hundred other marketeers of services. products or fund raisers. I am a big boy. I know how to say no. They're not threatening you with eternal hell. The sales schtick may seem similar but the cost will hardly be the same. If you are concerned with eternal hell maybe you should listen to them. :-) |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/4/2015 6:39 PM, jps wrote:
On 4 Jun 2015 22:10:59 GMT, Keyser Sze wrote: jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 17:58:07 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 4:54 PM, jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:25:51 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 3:20 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the ?creation point of view.? http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons? The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. None of that matters to those who have faith. You seem to have a hard time understanding that. The same "faith" they try to shove down the throats of others. As if their version has any more validity than the Mormons or the Scientologists, just because they're ancient. If there were a god, the Duggars would have been rendered impotent. I have people calling me or emailing me just about every day trying to shove something down my throat. Could be a car dealership, Direct TV, or one of a hundred other marketeers of services. products or fund raisers. I am a big boy. I know how to say no. They're not threatening you with eternal hell. The sales schtick may seem similar but the cost will hardly be the same. The sales folks are not passing laws to restrict your rights as a citizen. The fundie Christians and their enablers are. Good point. What laws are those? |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/4/15 6:57 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/4/2015 6:39 PM, jps wrote: On 4 Jun 2015 22:10:59 GMT, Keyser Sze wrote: jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 17:58:07 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 4:54 PM, jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:25:51 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 3:20 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the ?creation point of view.? http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons? The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. None of that matters to those who have faith. You seem to have a hard time understanding that. The same "faith" they try to shove down the throats of others. As if their version has any more validity than the Mormons or the Scientologists, just because they're ancient. If there were a god, the Duggars would have been rendered impotent. I have people calling me or emailing me just about every day trying to shove something down my throat. Could be a car dealership, Direct TV, or one of a hundred other marketeers of services. products or fund raisers. I am a big boy. I know how to say no. They're not threatening you with eternal hell. The sales schtick may seem similar but the cost will hardly be the same. The sales folks are not passing laws to restrict your rights as a citizen. The fundie Christians and their enablers are. Good point. What laws are those? Laws restricting abortion and other womens' health issues; legislation restricting access to state or federal health care programs; restrictions against gays/lesbians; defunding of Planned Parenthood; climate change denial; anti-immigrant regulations; pushing evangelism in the public school... The list is a long one. You may not see as much of it up in Massachusetts, which has far fewer christian crazies than other parts of the country. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 17:52:52 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: The problem arises not because of their faith, but because they try to push their religious beliefs on those who believe differently or not at all. Sounds like a familiar theme around here. === Touch. ;-) |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/4/2015 7:46 PM, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 6/4/15 6:57 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/4/2015 6:39 PM, jps wrote: On 4 Jun 2015 22:10:59 GMT, Keyser Sze wrote: jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 17:58:07 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 4:54 PM, jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:25:51 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 3:20 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the ?creation point of view.? http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons? The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. None of that matters to those who have faith. You seem to have a hard time understanding that. The same "faith" they try to shove down the throats of others. As if their version has any more validity than the Mormons or the Scientologists, just because they're ancient. If there were a god, the Duggars would have been rendered impotent. I have people calling me or emailing me just about every day trying to shove something down my throat. Could be a car dealership, Direct TV, or one of a hundred other marketeers of services. products or fund raisers. I am a big boy. I know how to say no. They're not threatening you with eternal hell. The sales schtick may seem similar but the cost will hardly be the same. The sales folks are not passing laws to restrict your rights as a citizen. The fundie Christians and their enablers are. Good point. What laws are those? Laws restricting abortion and other womens' health issues; legislation restricting access to state or federal health care programs; restrictions against gays/lesbians; defunding of Planned Parenthood; climate change denial; anti-immigrant regulations; pushing evangelism in the public school... The list is a long one. You may not see as much of it up in Massachusetts, which has far fewer christian crazies than other parts of the country. As far as I know getting an abortion is perfectly legal in the USA. The question, as it also applies to your other cites, is who pays for them? Is it right to mandate that taxpayers fund every issue and program regardless of personal views? They are political issues, not religious issues. that they |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/4/2015 5:58 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/4/2015 4:54 PM, jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:25:51 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 3:20 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the creation point of view. http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. None of that matters to those who have faith. You seem to have a hard time understanding that. The same "faith" they try to shove down the throats of others. As if their version has any more validity than the Mormons or the Scientologists, just because they're ancient. If there were a god, the Duggars would have been rendered impotent. I have people calling me or emailing me just about every day trying to shove something down my throat. Could be a car dealership, Direct TV, or one of a hundred other marketeers of services. products or fund raisers. I am a big boy. I know how to say no. Apparently Harry doesn't have the stones or will to say no. He just grumbles about it here, as if we care. -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/4/15 8:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 6/4/2015 7:46 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: Laws restricting abortion and other womens' health issues; legislation restricting access to state or federal health care programs; restrictions against gays/lesbians; defunding of Planned Parenthood; climate change denial; anti-immigrant regulations; pushing evangelism in the public school... The list is a long one. You may not see as much of it up in Massachusetts, which has far fewer christian crazies than other parts of the country. As far as I know getting an abortion is perfectly legal in the USA. The question, as it also applies to your other cites, is who pays for them? Is it right to mandate that taxpayers fund every issue and program regardless of personal views? They are political issues, not religious issues. You're not up to speed on the abortion issue. In many red states, the clinics that provided them have been shut down, typically by red state governors passing rules aimed solely at shutting them down. Oh, and as for your other comments, I was addressing the religious pressure that is bringing about these restrictions, not their financial impact, if any. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
jps wrote:
On 4 Jun 2015 22:10:59 GMT, Keyser Söze wrote: jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 17:58:07 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 4:54 PM, jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:25:51 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 3:20 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Söze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the ?creation point of view.? http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons? The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. None of that matters to those who have faith. You seem to have a hard time understanding that. The same "faith" they try to shove down the throats of others. As if their version has any more validity than the Mormons or the Scientologists, just because they're ancient. If there were a god, the Duggars would have been rendered impotent. I have people calling me or emailing me just about every day trying to shove something down my throat. Could be a car dealership, Direct TV, or one of a hundred other marketeers of services. products or fund raisers. I am a big boy. I know how to say no. They're not threatening you with eternal hell. The sales schtick may seem similar but the cost will hardly be the same. The sales folks are not passing laws to restrict your rights as a citizen. The fundie Christians and their enablers are. Good point. Actually lots of leftists are passing laws restricting citizens! Such as no smoking. Taxing soft drinks. Can not buy a Big Gulp in NYC. They know better than us how to live a good life. Seems as if it is a religion with them. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On 6/4/2015 9:18 PM, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 6/4/15 8:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/4/2015 7:46 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: Laws restricting abortion and other womens' health issues; legislation restricting access to state or federal health care programs; restrictions against gays/lesbians; defunding of Planned Parenthood; climate change denial; anti-immigrant regulations; pushing evangelism in the public school... The list is a long one. You may not see as much of it up in Massachusetts, which has far fewer christian crazies than other parts of the country. As far as I know getting an abortion is perfectly legal in the USA. The question, as it also applies to your other cites, is who pays for them? Is it right to mandate that taxpayers fund every issue and program regardless of personal views? They are political issues, not religious issues. You're not up to speed on the abortion issue. In many red states, the clinics that provided them have been shut down, typically by red state governors passing rules aimed solely at shutting them down. Oh, and as for your other comments, I was addressing the religious pressure that is bringing about these restrictions, not their financial impact, if any. All these social issues you clamor for come with a price tag. Luddite merely asked who pays the bill. Your stock answer is ALWAYS "someone with deeper pockets than Harry Krause". With all of the good fortune you've had over the years, why don't you feel that you should pay something back, in the form of taxes due and other things? Please bring us up to speed on your efforts to become fiscally, socially, ethically and morally responsible. -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." |
Stupid is as stupid does...
On Fri, 05 Jun 2015 06:42:39 -0400, Justan Olphart
wrote: You're not up to speed on the abortion issue. In many red states, the clinics that provided them have been shut down, typically by red state governors passing rules aimed solely at shutting them down. Oh, and as for your other comments, I was addressing the religious pressure that is bringing about these restrictions, not their financial impact, if any. All these social issues you clamor for come with a price tag. Luddite merely asked who pays the bill. Your stock answer is ALWAYS "someone with deeper pockets than Harry Krause". With all of the good fortune you've had over the years, why don't you feel that you should pay something back, in the form of taxes due and other things? Please bring us up to speed on your efforts to become fiscally, socially, ethically and morally responsible. === The biggest good fortune that Harry has enjoyed is not being in jail even though he richly deserves it. |
Stupid is as stupid does...
Keyser Sze wrote:
On 6/4/15 6:57 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/4/2015 6:39 PM, jps wrote: On 4 Jun 2015 22:10:59 GMT, Keyser Sze wrote: jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 17:58:07 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 4:54 PM, jps wrote: On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 15:25:51 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/4/2015 3:20 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/4/15 3:05 PM, jps wrote: On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 10:25:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 6/3/2015 9:40 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 6/3/15 9:31 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/3/2015 6:51 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: When a student in Louisiana opens her textbook in biology class, she might not have the standard Miller and Levine Biology with a dragonfly on the cover, and she might not ever learn about evolution. For some Louisiana *public school* students, their science textbook is the Bible, and in biology class they read the Book of Genesis to learn the ?creation point of view.? http://tinyurl.com/q75dhm4 Ah, Louisiana is raising its next generation of ignorant, stupid, superstitious morons? The bible has no place in the public schools as a source of factual material. Suggest you go read your own link again. They are not primarily teaching creationism as "the" origin of life. They also teach the concept of evolution. Both are presented as theories and creationism is presented as an argument against the theory of evolution. It's not singularly taught in the biology class curriculum. The bible has no place in the public's schools as "an argument against the theory of evolution. The ignorant simply do not understand what "theory" means in the context of evolutionary theory. Actually, the bible has no place in the public's K-12 schools, other than a brief mention of it as the underpinning of several religions. Here's the problem as I see it. These kids are going to public school and learning the "approved" course of evolution in their biology class. This makes the federal government and people like yourself happy. Then, particularly in the south, they learn about creationism at home or in their Sunday School classes. They are now confused. Which is the correct story? Isn't it better to present both as theories that people can make their own minds up about? Isn't that the purpose of general education? Why does it have to be only one discussion? One is a theory, supported by observable science. The other is a collection of stories that have little if any basis in fact, assuming facts require the support of evidence. Hard as it may be to believe, *I* had religious training when I was a youngster, and read about and was *taught* many of the tales in the bible, including that nonsense in Genesis about creation. I don't recall more than two or three kids who accepted the bible as anything other than a text in which belief in what it stated was based almost entirely on faith. I might have been 10 or 11 when I gave up entirely on belief in a creator. One of the kids down the street was diagnosed with leukemia and died in a couple of months, despite many efforts to save him. That was my first sort of direct encounter with death, and when we kids talked about it, several of us concluded there obviously was no god because if there was, he/she/it wouldn't let innocent little kids die of horrific diseases. In junior high and high school I was friends with a kid who had contracted polio and while he survived, he was left with a limp and a leg brace. Fortunately, he was a really smart kid in science and math and there was no doubt he would "make it" in the world, but, again, I wondered, why would god let a kid contract polio? God is a construct of man. It isn't the other way around. The bible is a nice book of mostly fictional stories written, edited, and compiled by men and turned into beautiful English in the King James version. It's a great read, for sure, but it isn't reality, history, or science. It's fiction. None of that matters to those who have faith. You seem to have a hard time understanding that. The same "faith" they try to shove down the throats of others. As if their version has any more validity than the Mormons or the Scientologists, just because they're ancient. If there were a god, the Duggars would have been rendered impotent. I have people calling me or emailing me just about every day trying to shove something down my throat. Could be a car dealership, Direct TV, or one of a hundred other marketeers of services. products or fund raisers. I am a big boy. I know how to say no. They're not threatening you with eternal hell. The sales schtick may seem similar but the cost will hardly be the same. The sales folks are not passing laws to restrict your rights as a citizen. The fundie Christians and their enablers are. Good point. What laws are those? Laws restricting abortion and other womens' health issues; legislation restricting access to state or federal health care programs; restrictions against gays/lesbians; defunding of Planned Parenthood; climate change denial; anti-immigrant regulations; pushing evangelism in the public school... The list is a long one. You may not see as much of it up in Massachusetts, which has far fewer christian crazies than other parts of the country. Laws are passed in congress, not by any religious group. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:44 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com