Bush supports Intelligent Design
Author
President Dubya announced yesterday be believes Intelligent Design should be taught in schools. He doesn't support replacing evolution with ID, but says enough people believe in ID that it warrants teaching in the classroom.
So, will students have 2nd period Science, then 3rd period Make-Believe 101?
So he believes if public opinion is high enough, it should be taught in schools. Cool. So when will we start teaching that the holocaust didn't really happen? Or that we never landed on the moon? Or that he cheated and rigged the elections of 2000 and 2004? Enough people believe in those to warrant them in school.
// edit: fixed title typo
[Edited by - LessBread on August 5, 2005 3:16:40 AM]
Although I personally think its a load of balls ID should be taught in schools but not as a science, it should be given the same consideration as all the other creation stories which exist.
Intelligent design is a theory. Not a very good one, IMO, but there's clearly nothing wrong with teaching it, if it's presented as what it is.
What's there to teach about it, besides "we were made by an intelligent being"? All I ever hear about intelligent design is arguments against evolution, which certainly should be at least mentioned in the classroom.
What's there to teach about it, besides "we were made by an intelligent being"? All I ever hear about intelligent design is arguments against evolution, which certainly should be at least mentioned in the classroom.
I agree with you pretty much 100%, though I would be careful about using "Make Believe" to describe religious ideas that are held by many on this board.
I don't happen to believe in ID, but I think that that is a non-issue. What is at steak here is the separation of church and state. I don't think its right at all to teach people ID as a scientific theory though it is missing any evidence to suggest the possibility that it could have happened. I respect the fact that people have their own religious ideas, but it shouldn't be taught in school.
I don't happen to believe in ID, but I think that that is a non-issue. What is at steak here is the separation of church and state. I don't think its right at all to teach people ID as a scientific theory though it is missing any evidence to suggest the possibility that it could have happened. I respect the fact that people have their own religious ideas, but it shouldn't be taught in school.
Quote:Original post by George Bush
You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas; the answer is yes.
When put that way it doesn't sound quite so rediculous. However there are more important things that should be taught in school and some things that should be left to the church. It also specificaly states in the constitution that there should be a separation of church and state and by teaching biblical beliefs in a public education system...
Anyway I keep finding myself wondering how the usualy big fans of the constitution manage to step on it so many times.
Quote:Original post by twix
Intelligent design is a theory.
I wouldn't even give it that much credit. It's not that it's impossible, it's just that there's no legitimate evidence, at all.
The opponents of ID, let me know when the evolution theory will become an even somehow viable theory (theat is, patch it's huge holes). Like, for example, how did the gender separation start.
Teaching intelligent design should take a total of about 10 seconds in class. ("Some people believe we were created by one or more intelligent entities, now on to something with actual evidence that can be proven or disproven.") Arguments against evolution should already be taught in science classes anyway, it wouldn't be very scientific not to do so.
Quote:Original post by tstrimpQuote:Original post by George Bush
You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas; the answer is yes.
When put that way it doesn't sound quite so rediculous. However there are more important things that should be taught in school and some things that should be left to the church. It also specificaly states in the constitution that there should be a separation of church and state and by teaching biblical beliefs in a public education system...
Anyway I keep finding myself wondering how the usualy big fans of the constitution manage to step on it so many times.
Certainly if it's meant to be taught as "gospel truth" ([grin]) then there's something wrong with that. But if it's presented side-by-side with evolution, what's the problem?
Especially since, as Samith says, there's literally nothing whatsoever to the concept aside from one simple statement. Everything else an ID believer will tell you is nothing more than an argument against evolution, which should definitely be presented in science classes when they teach evolution itself.
Quote: It also specificaly states in the constitution that there should be a separation of church and state
No, it doesnt. It says that the gov't will not sponsor/support any one religion. ID is not a religion, it is a philosophy that is held by many different religions.
Edit:
And though this thread is already spiralling into an argument -about- ID, let me just ask: whats worse: the president standing up for his personal philosophy, or sheepishly remaining quiet about his beliefs because it will get him in trouble with some of the public?
I dont agree with him in any way, but I refuse to join in this communal sense of "Nobody's allowed to believe in anything" crap that a lot of american's are pushing. Let the man stand an claim his beliefs. Just because YOU dont like it doesnt mean he isnt allowed to have them, and the entire rest of the government system is there to keep him from just pushing his beliefs on the country.
This pressure to remain silent abot your beliefs if you value your popularity/career is sounding very scary.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
