gbaji wrote:
Regarding the rights of parents to teach their children creationism in the home or at church: Gbaji wrote:
However, I could certainly find Liberal groups who clearly *do* have the agenda of making it illegal to teach creationism to any children,
Out of context. And unproven by you.
I don't have to prove anything. You made the claim, the burden of proof is upon you.
Quote:
This link has some interesting information.
The study found that almost half of all Americans had never even heard of creationism.
They may not have heard of it referred to as "creationism" but considering the large religious majority in our country is Judeo-Christian, and considering the very first chapter in the very first book of the Judeo-Christian holy texts says that God created the world in seven days, the idea that none of them know of "creationism" is idiotic, to say the least.
Quote:
While the *valid* argument is that creationism does not belong in a science class, that often gets transmorgified into "ceationism does not belong in school". The sheer number of times it's expressed this way gives weight to that assessment.
But that is not what you SAID. What you SAID is that Liberals are campaigning to not allow children to be taught creationism AT ALL, which is absurd, because NO ONE with a healthy respect for the Bill of Rights (which is the document Liberals most concern themselves with seeing gets upheld) would even consider denying a parent the right to teach their child whatever religious doctrine so desired in their own home or the religious institution of their choice. The "creationism does not belong in school" argument you decry addresses the idea of our children being indoctrinated to a certain religious belief regardless of the First Amendment rights of their parents, and you know it. Few, if any, liberals would ever say it couldn't be discussed in a non-compulsive comparitive religion or philosophy class.
Quote:
That a combination of factors is not just preventing creationism from being taught in science class, but is preventing it from being taught *at all* in any form of class (even elective ones),
Again, that is not what you said.
Quote:
Sigh. Out of context again. That was *specifically* in response to the article Pat had linked.
Lies. It was a statement about "date rape" in general, and was followed up by several lengthy posts claiming that ALL "real" rapes leave physical trauma.
Yeah, nice try spinning, but the fact is, you put your foot in it by making outrageous claims and got nailed doing so. Suck it up.
Edited, Tue Oct 18 01:47:48 2005 by Ambrya
