Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : To be a Liberal,you have to believe that..... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (2139)	9/14/1999 9:41:00 AM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6418

Steven, I never suggested that we teach christianity the bible or any of the other issues you inferential jumped on to students. But when credible people present credible evidence that an assumption is being challenged (such as darwinism). It should be presented to students as "there are some scientists who disagree and believe darwinism is only a theory. Here is their book if you are interested". The reason that this is not done, is not because of some akin-ship to, as you say.... There are cultures that believe that the world sits on the back of a giant turtle. Shall we teach that too? That's a red herring and you know it. Comparing apples to oranges doesn't do your argument justice. It looks to me as if these books challenge your assumption and belief's so much that you fear others reading them? These are serious works from scholarly individuals. To dismiss them out of hand the way you seem to is anti-intellectualism at its best. Are these really such major elements of the curriculum? Why do you find the ideas of understanding basic sexual biology, practicing safe sex, and accepting homosexuals as equals so horrifying? That's the point, they shouldn't be major elements. But for some bizarre reason many atheists who fear the parenting techniques of other adults force them into our schools. The real point is they have shown no evidence that they work. And there is quite a bit of anecdotal evidence to support the notion that teaching them has lead to an increase in teenage pregnancy, abortion, AIDS as well as many other destructive social problems. Why not teach abstinence? Why not have faith in the individual families to instill these kind of values to their own children? It looks to me like you want the cake and the ability to eat it too. I am against vouchers which many christians are for, and I am against the stopping of teaching many elements which run contrary to the morality of christians. But you christians must accept my teachings to your children. Now who's moral values are being forced on whom here Steven? Why is it ok in your mind for parents to pay for schools which have God removed from the element of teaching, but not ok for them to decide to send their child to a christian school? Why not give parents and students the freedom to make up their own mind? Michael

To: Dayuhan who wrote (2139)	9/14/1999 12:37:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Respond to of 6418

I haven't looked at the Johnson book, but I red several chapters of Behe's, I don't know the Behe book, but Johnson (and his book) are controversial at Berkeley... apparently Johnson is a lawyer and the book is full of attacks on scientific techniques in general. Some people think Johnson has some sort of personal resentment towards the scientific community.. maybe some kind of politics at Cal, I don't know. He claims that scientists don't examine the "god-case"... or that of any higher-force type of argument, the implication being yet another consipiracy theory (yawn), when in fact these claims cannot be proven or disproven which is the real issue as to why they are never examined by the scientific community. The funniest thing from him is that he apparently feels his credentials as a law professor and evangelical christian are superior preparation for this debate vs. your average scientist (who comes to the table biased).. heh