SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (426711)10/15/2008 4:07:04 PM
From: SilentZ  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1574606
 
>So is jealousy and gluttony. Doesn't mean they should be taught in schools.

How are they equivalent, other than that religion says they are?

>By the way, atheism was indeed argued as a religion way back when religion was deemed OK in public schools. This was back when government was protecting the free exercise of religion, but prohibiting the atheist point-of-view from being espoused because atheism supposedly wasn't protected under the 1st amendment.

But that's stupid and not part of my argument.

> But it's really hypocritical to push one point-of-view, the censor yet another because you think that when it comes to religion, the 1st amendment errs on the side of public censorship.

Who's pushing atheism? Hint... teaching science is not the same as teaching atheism.

-Z



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (426711)10/15/2008 7:35:58 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1574606
 
Z, > It's a scientifically natural thing. I don't know how you can deny it.

So is jealousy and gluttony. Doesn't mean they should be taught in schools.

Why not? In fact, they are taught in school.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News