New Evolution spat in U.S. schools goes to court

[peat moss]

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - A new battle over teaching about man's origins in U.S. schools goes to court for the first time next week, pitting Christian conservatives against educators and scientists in a trial viewed as the biggest test of the issue since the late 1980s.

Eleven parents of students at a Pennsylvania high school are suing over the school district's decision to include "intelligent design" -- an alternative to evolution that involves a God-like creator -- in the curriculum of ninth-grade biology classes.


The parents and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) say the policy of the Dover Area School District in south-central Pennsylvania violates the constitutional separation of church and state, which forbids teaching religion in public schools.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't know I was brought up with the lords prayer over the intercom every morning I turned out ok . I'm not religious in any way but would n't mind my little ones hearing it . Can't they hear both sides then make up their own minds ?



Oops : http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...092300927.html

[3RA1N1AC]

uh... why is this "intelligent design belongs in science classes" noise still on? regardless of whether there's any metaphysical truth to it, metaphysics is not a scientific discipline by any stretch.

teach it in a philosophy or religious studies class? fine. but it's got basically nothing in common with scientific theory as scientists & educators define it, 'cause you can't empirically observe or test the invisible world, the beyond, the afterlife, alternate dimensions, etc and can't offer an explanation in theory form. at best it's a mere hypothesis which some eager folks have prematurely promoted to the rank of "theory," and they really should be told to go home and learn the difference between hypothesis & theory (which is completely different from how a layman might say "my theory is..." when he really means "i suspect, perhaps..." or "i have faith in the idea...").

[peat moss]

Wow brainiac is right ! At what grade tho 7 ?

[HeavyMetalParkingLot]

Nothing new here at all, been going on for years, and will continue for years. Nothing to see here citizens, move along.

[j2k4]

Notice how this is written:

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - A new battle over teaching about man's origins in U.S. schools goes to court for the first time next week, pitting Christian (VERY BAD!!!) conservatives (INCREDIBLY BAD AND EVIL!!!) against educators (GOOD, BENEFICIENT AND AGENDA-FREE!!!) and scientists (GOOD; THE SMARTEST PEOPLE ON THE ENTIRE PLANET, LOOKING OUT FOR YOU!!!) in a trial viewed as the biggest test of the issue since the late 1980s.

Reuters...you can always count on them.

[Rat Faced]

I think thats your perception only J2..

They have designated 2 sides to the case, which is normal practice... your the one that has said "good" and "bad" to those sides, not reuters.

If its which one is 1st, then you must also allow that in:

"the People/State" vs "whoever"

The State/People must be bad and the "whoever" good... weird thing for a conservative to think...

[j2k4]

I think thats your perception only J2..

They have designated 2 sides to the case, which is normal practice... your the one that has said "good" and "bad" to those sides, not reuters.

If its which one is 1st, then you must also allow that in:

"the People/State" vs "whoever"

The State/People must be bad and the "whoever" good... weird thing for a conservative to think...

You fail to acknowledge the demonization of Christians and Conservatives is an on-going and pervasive process, Rat.

They could have been described as something innocuous, like...an "advocacy group", you see?

It is much like saying "A Fundamentalist Christian Group Bombed a Family-Planning Clinic", rather than, "A Religious Group Bombed an Abortion Clinic".

Maybe you don't see any difference, given the high ground you watch from.

[JPaul]

I've asked this before, why does intelligent design have to involve God.

I personally think it does, but I don't think it's a must. The entity who created our universe, who set all the rules, could have subsequently died.

[Rat Faced]

I think thats your perception only J2..

They have designated 2 sides to the case, which is normal practice... your the one that has said "good" and "bad" to those sides, not reuters.

If its which one is 1st, then you must also allow that in:

"the People/State" vs "whoever"

The State/People must be bad and the "whoever" good... weird thing for a conservative to think...

You fail to acknowledge the demonization of Christians and Conservatives is an on-going and pervasive process, Rat.

They could have been described as something innocuous, like...an "advocacy group", you see?

It is much like saying "A Fundamentalist Christian Group Bombed a Family-Planning Clinic", rather than, "A Religious Group Bombed an Abortion Clinic".

Maybe you don't see any difference, given the high ground you watch from.

In the same way as say...

"A Fundamentalist Islamic Group bombed an Israeli Military Checkpoint" as opposed to "A Religious Group bombed Armed Israeli Soldiers"..

Seems you only wish this way of communicating when it suits you

[j2k4]

I've asked this before, why does intelligent design have to involve God.

I personally think it does, but I don't think it's a must. The entity who created our universe, who set all the rules, could have subsequently died.

Just so; your post (as an example) seems to have been 'intelligently designed'.

As an adjunct thought:

Many here have, in other threads and over other subjects, said things like, "How can any intelligent person discount the possiblity of life elswhere in the universe?"

Methinks if you've ever professed a belief in, or even expressed a willingness to countenance the chance of, extra-terrestrial life, you are de facto an advocate for intelligent design.