Religion+Politics=Bad for students

**TheVitaleMob** · 11-09-2005, 11:48 AM

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/nation/3448104

Whatever happened to the seperation of church and state?

**Shagaroo** · 11-09-2005, 11:51 AM

We need a popcorn eatin' smiley. This has all the makings of a trainwreck.

**Drake** · 11-09-2005, 12:00 PM

linky no worky.

i think there should be more religion taught in school. but not just christianity. but inform children unbiasedly (is that a word?) about many religions. but i don't really think it should be mandatory. that would cause quite a stink.

**edited for typo

**Kayakinboy** · 11-09-2005, 12:05 PM

Link won't load for me.

I believe very much in the seperation of church and state. They should have nothing to do with the other. People who ask "How can you say that? This is one nation under God"?, what if the US was founded by devil worshipers (this is a joke and example) it would be one nation under Satan.

Just my thoughts. Also I don't agree with teaching christian classes in public schools. I debated this pretty heavly before. I personally wouldn't want my tax dollars going towards something like this and also I think if there is such a class (like there is here in the bible belt buckle) they should be funded by the students and parents who allow that class to go on.

**Kayakinboy** · 11-09-2005, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by Drake

linky no worky.

i think there should be more religion taught in school. but not just christianity. but inform children unbiasedly (is that a word?) about many religions. but i don't really think it should be mandatory. that was cause quite a stink.

if religon was to be taught in schools, I'd like that format myself. Not just one side!

**SuperChuck** · 11-09-2005, 01:06 PM

Originally Posted by Drake

i think there should be more religion taught in school. but not just christianity. but inform children unbiasedly (is that a word?) about many religions.

Amen!

My gf and I were just talking about this last night. They keep taking the religion OUT of schools, which is just increasing intolerance.

Sure, when I was a kid, there was Christmas and that was it. You painted pictures of Santa and Baby Jesus and all that other nonsense. These days we realize that's not quite right. But our solution is to take Santa out of the picture and make you paint snowflakes.

I was celebrating Channuka even when I considered myself a Christian. It's a beautiful holiday. Instead of kicking Santa out and making all the Christian kids angry, bring Channuka in!

Separation of Church and State dos NOT create an athiest state. What it does create is a state without a state religion. Recall that Great Britain's official church is the Church of England, which is run by the king. In fact, one could argue that state religion WOULD be consitutional so long as the church was not run by a state official.

Darwinism is a religion unto itself, anyway. Darwinism doesn't actually work out. We're now seeing that evolutions seem to happen very swiftly and almost always in line with environmental conditions (i.e., not random mutation). Darwin has been embraced for one reason: it does not mention God. In fact, evolution occurs more like Genesis than Darwin. Homos appear on the scene pretty much instantly, not through millions of years of evolution from apes.

**TheVitaleMob** · 11-11-2005, 01:53 AM

Alright, linky no worky because it was from Google News.

Anyway, it was a link to the story about including intelligent design in the classroom in Kansas. Now, I was raised a Catholic, and am very rapidly becoming(sp) unreligious. IMHO, most religious organizations are based on guilt and politics, and as George Carlin once said, are trying to control your mind because thats the game they're in. I try to be a good person, helping people if i can, but i don't think that I need to feel guilty because of original sin, or for the idea that God sent his son to us and we killed him. I also royaly hate the fact that these people feel the need to tell me what to do, and that I should be guilty. I have seriously considered buying that bumper sticker "Lord save me from your followers" many times. I don't subscribe to Darwinism either, but I don't think that Intelligent Design is science. In fact, most religions are mutally exclusive with some areas of science.

Now, that being said, I do understand that there are many people that belong to religious organizations that do not behave the way I have stated above, good for you, you are rational people. I like you. I just can't stand it when somebody thinks that I should be sorry and guilty for something that I have not done.

**bgmark2** · 05-20-2007, 03:08 AM

yes but evryone being so pc...would get taught budda and stuff

**WOXOF** · 05-20-2007, 05:31 AM

Originally Posted by bgmark2

yes but evryone being so pc...would get taught budda and stuff

My nomination for troll of the month. Now fuck off.

**SmokinDVM** · 05-20-2007, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by SuperChuck

In fact, one could argue that state religion WOULD be consitutional so long as the church was not run by a state official.

You COULD argue that, but it WOULD be wrong.

Originally Posted by SuperChuck

Darwinism is a religion unto itself, anyway. Darwinism doesn't actually work out. We're now seeing that evolutions seem to happen very swiftly and almost always in line with environmental conditions (i.e., not random mutation). Darwin has been embraced for one reason: it does not mention God. In fact, evolution occurs more like Genesis than Darwin. Homos appear on the scene pretty much instantly, not through millions of years of evolution from apes.

There is NO such thing as "Darwinism". It is simply a term created by religious people to make it seem that science, or even atheism, is a religion, which it is NOT.

The theories Darwin produced in his book The Origin of Species are still valid in that the general ideas of Evolution have been proven true. In fact, evolution happens at differing rates. There is always a slow gradual change taking place within a species from generation to generation. At the same time, larger, more visibly apparent changes take place when changes to the immediate environment force such changes, or the species becomes extinct.

Question: Since you know that Homo sapiens appeared instantly, when did this happen, exactly? Could you please point me in the direction of such scientific evidence?

**drew_goring** · 05-20-2007, 03:39 PM

Originally Posted by SmokinDVM

You COULD argue that, but it WOULD be wrong.

There is NO such thing as "Darwinism". It is simply a term created by religious people to make it seem that science, or even atheism, is a religion, which it is NOT.

The theories Darwin produced in his book The Origin of Species are still valid in that the general ideas of Evolution have been proven true. In fact, evolution happens at differing rates. There is always a slow gradual change taking place within a species from generation to generation. At the same time, larger, more visibly apparent changes take place when changes to the immediate environment force such changes, or the species becomes extinct.

Question: Since you know that Homo sapiens appeared instantly, when did this happen, exactly? Could you please point me in the direction of such scientific evidence?

Question: do you know this thread has been inactive for over a year and a half?

**nhcigarfan** · 05-20-2007, 06:02 PM

Religion + Politics = Bad for Cigarsmokers.com

**heftysmokes** · 05-20-2007, 07:12 PM

Originally Posted by nhcigarfan

Religion + Politics = Bad for Cigarsmokers.com

**cigarsarge** · 05-20-2007, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by nhcigarfan

Religion + Politics = Bad for Cigarsmokers.com

I totally agree...This is a cigar board.

**bgmark2** · 05-20-2007, 07:58 PM

thankyou...phew did not want this one...

**bgmark2** · 05-20-2007, 07:59 PM

opps got lost

**bgmark2** · 05-20-2007, 08:03 PM

thankyou beats getting this one...

**bgmark2** · 05-20-2007, 08:04 PM

no is not me...when reply to another post end up replying here

**bgmark2** · 05-20-2007, 08:13 PM

There is NO such thing as "Darwinism". It is simply a term created by religious people to make it seem that science, or even atheism, is a religion, which it is NOT.

The theories Darwin produced in his book The Origin of Species are still valid in that the general ideas of Evolution have been proven true. In fact, evolution happens at differing rates. There is always a slow gradual change taking place within a species from generation to generation. At the same time, larger, more visibly apparent changes take place when changes to the immediate environment force such changes, or the species becomes extinct.

Question: Since you know that Homo sapiens appeared instantly, when did this happen, exactly? Could you please point me in the direction of such scientific evidence?

Yes the idea of evoltion has been proven true...science is not a religion, but has not as yet explained the origins of life and just to think we all evolved from a single cell...maybe planton...then into more cells...a fish perhaps...then a bird...then a flying monkey...then an ape...to a man...evolution is amazing. This is what Darwin and scientists propose, and this mysteriously happened by chance against extreme probrabilities

**DPB** · 05-20-2007, 08:53 PM

Highly improbable is maybe a better choice of words. But yet possible because here we are talking about it and it only took about 4.5 billion years. Here is a good link-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
Science today does not have the answer for the origins of life but scientists are getting very close. But this does not mean we should put superstitious beliefs in its place in the mean time because that is not a better explanation of life's origins. Many centuries ago deities were used to explain natural phenomenons because of the lack of information and technology to measure and explain these phenomenons. Today in the 21st century things are explained alot better through scientific means.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwinism this is an interesting link also.
peace
Doug