Dear God, please leave me alone... prayer in school?

Hellie

Lost
.......Just like you're trying to shove it down our throats that we came from apes?

Er no.:mad:...i was expressing an opinion on a public forum just like everyone else on here is entitled to.I don`t go knocking on peoples doors and try to lecture them on the evils of the world.Shove leaflets through peoples doors or tell them they are evil as i was told by a lovely Jehovas lady.The Gospel church is as bad always badgering me to and my family to go along.
 

Buzzetta

WOOOOOOOO!!!!!
Me? I believe that evolution was the process of how God made us.
 

SNS22

Not Dead Yet
I think for those of us who support evolution rather than lean toward Intelligent Design or creationism to be crass, it is incredibly frustrating to continue to debate something that is overwhelmingly supported by scientific evidence.

It is also a frightening time if science is being questioned in this manner and that doubts are raised over the scientific method. If ID is accepted as a valid theory that should be taught alongside evolution, then science is devalued and considered nothing more than mysticism. Consequences for this can be catastrophic and although that sounds fairly dramatic, it is something that Richard Dawkins explored in a recent documentary. It appears that there are significant trends towards mysticism in the public sphere in recent times.

oh shut up with your "EVIDENCE"....

There is sufficent "evidence" to show that certain animals and plants are related to each other, but I don't see any Videos on youtube showing that Plants "Became" fungi and Fungi became "Animals"..That is utter Horseshit and anyone with half a brain could figure that out...

But if you want to believe that you're related to A Mushroom,

By All means go ahead and believe that...It's obvious your Brain is made of nothing more than the common shower Mildew...
 

SNS22

Not Dead Yet
Hmm...okay. I guess I will stop. It seems this conversation will only lead you to become upset and I don't want to do that.

If you can only discuss things by resorting to name calling and insults, then YouTube is an appropriate forum for you to learn about these things. I gave you a little bit more credit. It's truly my mistake. I had enjoyed your posts in other threads and thought you might like to share your thoughts and conclusions here. I apologise.

don't apologise! if you got something to say on the matter bloody well say it!

(SNS22 isn't a 'fungi' then!!!!):p
 

Amy

from the Ice Age to the dole age
Er no.:mad:...i was expressing an opinion on a public forum just like everyone else on here is entitled to.I don`t go knocking on peoples doors and try to lecture them on the evils of the world.Shove leaflets through peoples doors or tell them they are evil as i was told by a lovely Jehovas lady.The Gospel church is as bad always badgering me to and my family to go along.


And neither do the vast majority of religious people :rolleyes:
 

Sir Alec

Anorak
Everything about this universe evolves. People age and grow. Ideas become inventions. Clouds of gas become stars and the particles surrounding them become planets and satellites. Moisture in the air becomes rain storms. Everything in this universe changes gradually, expands, and eventually degrades. Why not life itself? Anyways, we see changes in organisms everyday. Its been shown that human teeth have changed over the past many centuries because if dietary changes. We see micro-evolution all the time. Viruses evolve and knock away our abilities to get rid of them. Bacterias develop new ways to cope with man made chemicals. Same goes for Mosquitos. Is this not proof that evolution is part of how this universe works?

And why is it so hard to believe that God made an evolving universe?
 

Buzzetta

WOOOOOOOO!!!!!
Everything about this universe evolves. People age and grow. Ideas become inventions. Clouds of gas become stars and the particles surrounding them become planets and satellites. Moisture in the air becomes rain storms. Everything in this universe changes gradually, expands, and eventually degrades. Why not life itself? Anyways, we see changes in organisms everyday. Its been shown that human teeth have changed over the past many centuries because if dietary changes. We see micro-evolution all the time. Viruses evolve and knock away our abilities to get rid of them. Bacterias develop new ways to cope with man made chemicals. Same goes for Mosquitos. Is this not proof that evolution is part of how this universe works?

And why is it so hard to believe that God made an evolving universe?

Exactly
 
Everything about this universe evolves. People age and grow. Ideas become inventions. Clouds of gas become stars and the particles surrounding them become planets and satellites. Moisture in the air becomes rain storms. Everything in this universe changes gradually, expands, and eventually degrades. Why not life itself? Anyways, we see changes in organisms everyday. Its been shown that human teeth have changed over the past many centuries because if dietary changes. We see micro-evolution all the time. Viruses evolve and knock away our abilities to get rid of them. Bacterias develop new ways to cope with man made chemicals. Same goes for Mosquitos. Is this not proof that evolution is part of how this universe works?

And why is it so hard to believe that God made an evolving universe?


"wow man.........way out! Just starting to understand"
 
A

Alcoholic Afternoons

Guest
No, I did not equate Christianity with intolerance. In fact what I said was common sense and in different terms could be stated thus: "In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you" (Matthew 7:12).

Sorry, but that's a really poor interpretation of the Golden Rule. I don't think Jesus meant "tolerate those who tolerate you." You'd be closer if you said "intolerance for intolerance," but the Golden Rule is not "do unto others what they do unto you," it's "what YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO unto you."

You chose to interpret my bumper-sticker submission negatively. There are different kinds of Christians just as there are different kinds of atheists. I tolerate Christians who are tolerant of me. But I think the second half of the statement is equally important: I will not tolerate anyone who does not tolerate me. I'm open-minded until someone wants to change "may" to "shall".

I did not "choose" to interpret it that way, unless you mean in some subconscious sense. I did intepret it negatively, because it came after my post, and you quoted my post. In that context, without your subsequent explanation, the most likely interpretation would be that it was in response to my post, as an explanation for the intolerance, and not as an alternate thought. I recognize that's not what you meant, and it seems pointless to respond, but I did want to clarify that I wasn't going out of my way to look for a negative.

Here's some information right from The National Academy of Sciences. Note how the language sounds, particularly the second-to-last section and its explanation of how the word "fact" is used. This is not presented as a "fairy tale" or "founding myth" as Creationism is. Nor does it deny the existence of God, but merely says "Based on the evidence we have..." Scientists do not claim absolute truth.

Not in that example, but sometimes they do, and sometimes they use science to deny the existence of God just like some Christians (and people of other religions) are intolerant of and feel threatened by science and evolution. As others in this thread have pointed out, it's a false dilemma.

One of the many problems with arguing/discussing topics like this is that people on the one side tend to define their side by reference to the reasonable people with whom they agree and the other side with the fringe negative element that makes for an easy target. I know at least as many intolerant atheists as I do intolerant Christians, and I know as many scientists who are Christian as I do scientists who are not.

I'm Christian, and like Dave said about his own beliefs I have enough proof from my own experience that I'm certain of my beliefs. I don't expect everyone to share my beliefs, but I do expect people to respect them.
 

Worm

Taste the diffidence
Sorry, but that's a really poor interpretation of the Golden Rule. I don't think Jesus meant "tolerate those who tolerate you." You'd be closer if you said "intolerance for intolerance," but the Golden Rule is not "do unto others what they do unto you," it's "what YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO unto you."

Maybe what I said seemed inflammatory in context but it wasn't meant to be. I had thought it was common sense-- Dave seemed to think it was so pedestrian it might have been a cheap slogan-- but I guess not. I understand the distinction you make in Christian terms-- give even if you don't receive in kind-- but my intention was to draw a parallel in the potentiality of reciprocity, an idea which the Golden Rule invites reflection on without making it a literal imperative.

Not in that example, but sometimes they do, and sometimes they use science to deny the existence of God just like some Christians (and people of other religions) are intolerant of and feel threatened by science and evolution. As others in this thread have pointed out, it's a false dilemma.

Do they deny the existence of God, or merely the complete veracity of the Bible?

I don't think you're right about scientists speaking in absolutes, either with or without the intention of disproving religion. As I said before, you would be hard-pressed to find a teacher in this country who bangs his ruler on the desk and calls Christianity a fairy tale. More to the point, science classes also teach the scientific method. No halfway sensible student can go through an entire year of science and not understand that what is spoken of as "fact" in a science class is not absolute and eternally subject to revision. It's always "best evidence".

One of the many problems with arguing/discussing topics like this is that people on the one side tend to define their side by reference to the reasonable people with whom they agree and the other side with the fringe negative element that makes for an easy target. I know at least as many intolerant atheists as I do intolerant Christians, and I know as many scientists who are Christian as I do scientists who are not.

A fair comment, but this thread is about a specific case of religion encroaching on a public institution. In the state of Illinois a "may" became a "shall". Given all the facts I don't think we're talking about reasonable people. Maybe we're not talking about monsters, either, but news stories like this one still concern some people.

It would be remiss not to point out that the most reasonable sounding person in the whole debate was the Governor of Illinois, who vetoed the bill despite being a believing Christian and a parent. I posted his comment above and said I liked it.

On the flip side, you're right, there are some atheists who are nasty people, but as I tried (I guess in vain) to illustrate above, do you think it's a fair fight? Do you see the dark forces of godlessness lining up to slaughter the religious of the world? Do atheists have power in this country? Are the high school science teachers of the world so many evil terrorists undermining the Bible every day-- is that a realistic concern when every Christian either rejects those classes wholesale or learns to rationalize science with their belief in some way, as we've seen in this thread by (for example) Sir Alec?

You mentioned a false dilemma, and this is it. Certainly materialism and nihilism are serious problems confronting our societies, but right now they're not exactly dominating the headlines. The other guys are. I don't say that all Christians are unreasonable, insane fundamentalists-- very few are-- but then again, how many does it take to cause a cataclysmic event? Is this not the very same issue surrounding Iran, that we are afraid a maniac is going to build a bomb? You want to exclude the extreme cases from the debate, but the extreme cases are crashing the party.

The law works. Christianity thrives in this country. We don't need more fundamentalism. I welcome the idea of 99% of Americans being devout Jews, Muslims, and Christians. There is no reason to let any of their beliefs or practices become a legislated part of public institutions.

I'm Christian, and like Dave said about his own beliefs I have enough proof from my own experience that I'm certain of my beliefs. I don't expect everyone to share my beliefs, but I do expect people to respect them.

If I have disrespected your religious belief in some way, I apologize.
 
Last edited:

SNS22

Not Dead Yet
Intelligent Design DOES NOT equal religion...

When will the dunderheads get that throught their brain!!!!

It's simply an ALTERNATIVE THEROY to what is being Taught as FACT...

Seriously, why is so difficult to comprehend??

All the buildings in this world didn't just build themselves...

So why is it so f***ING DIFFICULT to accept the notion that Something that we don't know or understand DESIGNED this shithole we call the universe???

It's your own ignorance and prejudices that refuses to accept the possibility that SOMETHING is out there that is BIGGER than you, Smarter Than You, and More Powerful than you...

You people are as thickheaded and conceited as the Religious Fundimentialists you all claim to despise...
 
Last edited:
A

Alcoholic Afternoons

Guest
Are the high school science teachers of the world so many evil terrorists undermining the Bible every day-- is that a realistic concern when every Christian either rejects those classes wholesale or learns to rationalize science with their belief in some way, as we've seen in this thread by (for example) Sir Alec?

Meshing Genesis with evolution is a bit tough, but I think theories like the living universe are more consistent with something made, for example by God, than something that just happened. (See, e.g., Intelligent Design theories and the "found watch" idea.) SNS22 actually made a comment along the lines of one of my long-standing beliefs, which is that it's really weird to imagine all of this just "happening" somehow, far weirder than it is to believe in God making it. As TMYEM's smilies suggest, though, at some point this all gets pretty stoney and I'm reminded of Donald Sutherland in Animal House, explaining that the universe may all be a speck of dirt under some giant's fingernail.

You mentioned a false dilemma, and this is it. Certainly materialism and nihilism are serious problems confronting our societies, but right now they're not exactly dominating the headlines. The other guys are. I don't say that all Christians are unreasonable, insane fundamentalists-- very few are-- but then again, how many does it take to cause a cataclysmic event? Is this not the very same issue surrounding Iran, that we are afraid a maniac is going to build a bomb? You want to exclude the extreme cases from the debate, but the extreme cases are crashing the party.

The fundamentalists are certainly more of a danger in terms of causing a cataclysmic event, whereas materialism and nihilism are a threat in more of a slow burn sense, which makes them less noticable but dangerous in their own way. Now I'm reminded of a passage from Sherlock Holmes, which recently became the basis for the title of a book:

"Is there any point to which you would wish to draw my attention?"

"To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time."

"The dog did nothing in the night-time."

"That was the curious incident."

If I have disrespected your religious belief in some way, I apologize.

I don't think you did, and didn't intend that as directed towards you or anyone else on here. Sorry for the miscommunication.
 
D

Dave

Guest
People have always used mythologies to try to explain the world around them.
One person's understanding of God is going to be very different from another's and much of the misunderstanding ... comes with confusion about what “God” really means to the person speaking.

I totally agree here. When asked if I believe in God I say "Yes". But I might not believe the same thing as someone else that also says yes.

Giving allegiance to religion or a person or a nation, or even a sports team may help you make sense of the world you live in but is inevitably going to limit your understanding and appreciation of others’.
I don't agree at all. It's important to develop beliefs and you can understand while still seeing things differently.

It's important that children learn to think for themselves. Teaching them about religion, how it works and what people believe is useful as part of a wider curriculum but religious belief should not dictate the curriculum. Weakening the distinction between church and state, as in the subject of this thread, could lead to further intrusion of religion into public life, and people are right to be concerned about this. It is the stated intent of Christian right-wingers.
I disagree here, too. Children need to be taught and formed because they are children. Anyone that treats their child as an intellectual equal is making a foolish mistake. However, this is for the family to decide at home and has nothing to do with what happens at school.

I don't think teaching children about different religions or discussing religion at all should happen in school.
 

PregnantForTheLastTime

Hideous trait.
Wow... I've come back from a weekend away and I'm measurably surprised. SNS, I'm shocked. You've really surprised me.

The point I felt was obvious has been received. Just as the only arguments anyone ever puts forth against the legalization of gay marriage tap inevitably into religion, the only arguments for this thinly veiled "moment of silence" veer dangerously close to religion. As such, they have no place in American law.

It used to be that children were photographed nude from the waist up, back view, for their school records, to provide a longitudinal record of posture so that scoliosis could be caught in good time. Objectively, and with the gravitas brought about by the passage of time, this seems borderline inappropriate. Likewise, it's just better for schools to avoid the subject of individual religious beliefs entirely. Yes, religion exists. Yes, religious faith is a cornerstone of many people's lives. Yes, each of us has our own beliefs. To avoid the pressures of comparison and judgement, the matter NEEDS to be left right there and not examined further in the public schools. If it's that important to you, send your kid to the Muslim school. Send your kid to St. Christopher's or Southwest Chicago Christian Academy.

The school day is full enough. There is absolutely no need to open this can of worms that can only invite trouble. My child has the right to believe or not believe as he chooses, and ESPECIALLY the right not to be singled out for his beliefs. There is no credible argument for a "moment of silence" as part of the school day. None whatsoever.
 

Sir Alec

Anorak
Alcoholic...

Creation is a belief with no hard science behind it. Evolution is a belief with science behind it and I mean that in the nicest way possible. Therefore, only one can be taught in a biology class. And its not hard to think that things just got made. Its hard to believe it though, because its not possible to go back in time and observe it. And theres nothing to dig up and examine that will help prove that things just happened.

But the reality is that we can only observe minor biological evolution now. I can't go back in time and prove that evolution is the reason why we are here today. I can't go back in time and prove that things just happened. I can't go back in time to prove that god made life in the universe. But I can look at things in the present and recent past that lean towards a certain perspective, and with my mentality towards things I'll have to assume that micro-evolution means that macro-evolution is real.

Also (and this is not targeted at any particular person on this thread), I think it is very close-minded not to consider evolution as a possibility just because of religious or other beliefs. Just because I think the evolutionary theory is correct doesn't mean I don't look into other possibilities of how we got here (which is fun to do when stoned).
 

SNS22

Not Dead Yet
Meshing Genesis with evolution is a bit tough, but I think theories like the living universe are more consistent with something made, for example by God, than something that just happened. (See, e.g., Intelligent Design theories and the "found watch" idea.) SNS22 actually made a comment along the lines of one of my long-standing beliefs, which is that it's really weird to imagine all of this just "happening" somehow, far weirder than it is to believe in God making it. As TMYEM's smilies suggest, though, at some point this all gets pretty stoney and I'm reminded of Donald Sutherland in Animal House, explaining that the universe may all be a speck of dirt under some giant's fingernail.



The fundamentalists are certainly more of a danger in terms of causing a cataclysmic event, whereas materialism and nihilism are a threat in more of a slow burn sense, which makes them less noticable but dangerous in their own way. Now I'm reminded of a passage from Sherlock Holmes, which recently became the basis for the title of a book:

"Is there any point to which you would wish to draw my attention?"

"To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time."

"The dog did nothing in the night-time."

"That was the curious incident."



I don't think you did, and didn't intend that as directed towards you or anyone else on here. Sorry for the miscommunication.

The Complexity of a Microprocessor is so inheriently designed that is infinitely improbable that something of its nature could have come into being on its own...

When you think about the way atoms work and molecules and the complexity at which elements combine to form even more complex substances it is is even more infinitely improbable that such combinations could have "evolved" on their own...

Seriously, think about it...

TABLE SALT...comes from two highly poisonous substances...Sodium and Chlorine...and yet, somehow, Miraculously, the two form a non-lethal chemical compound? Are these substances ALIVE and do they Think about what it would be like if they "hook" up? No, what an absurd notion? ....why do some elements work together and others don't? Trial and Error? And how do they possible remember..."Uh, dude...hooking up with Iron, just ain't gonna work?...Pass it on to the rest of the Atoms like us in the world..."...NO....The only LOGICAL explanation is that something designed them to work with some elements and to not work with others...

It's a no-brainer....

Again, people dismiss Intelligent Design as just a watered down version of the biblical story of Genesis....What these people forget is that Genesis was written several Millenia ago for primitive people with absolutely no understanding of Science and the universe that surrounds us...Therefore of course, a simplistic explanation of God Created The World In 7 Days is what was written down...But even the most devout religious person can not answer the question...If the Sun wasn't created until Day 4, how did they tell time?

The simple answer is that as I stated, it is an alegory and simplistic explanation for something more highly sophesticated and complex that even today's scientists would BARELY understand...For all the power and intelligence of today's scientists they can not duplicate the power of the beginning of Life...so even if God did choose to convey that on biblical writers, today we wouldn't even have a clue to begin deciphering the awe-inspiring power of the origin of the universe...

Genesis states that the World was created in 7 days, but of course we have no way of knowing how long a "Day" was or even if each "Day" of creation was consecutive...For all intents and purposes the design and building of the universe could have taken millenia to actually bring about execute..like winding up a clock and setting everything in motion..."The Creator" (I'll refrain from saying God to remove "religious overtones") then excuted his masterwork which unfolded across the emptiness of space...stars were formed from the basic elements, which in turn gave birth to the elements as we know them...from Hydrogen all the way to Uranium....Evolution (for lack of a better word) is just a way of showing that "Creation" is A WORK IN PROGRESS...

But JUST AS EACH BASIC ELEMENT was Designed seperately, each Basic Form Of Life was Designed and Created seperatedly as well...Fish, Amphibians, Reptiles, Mammals, Birds...etc...were designed and created seperately...as It is a work in progress..different "species" then envolved from the Basic or Ancestor form...which explains extinct forms as well as the close relation between such animals as Foxes, Woves, Dingos...etc....But Felines are obviously not related to Canines or any other families of animals....I believe that this handiwork is all part of the plan and design of something that is far greater than you and I...

and I also believe that is more plausable than any "theory" of life evolving from Lifelessness....
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom