|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/27/2008
Posts: 201
Location: UK
|
No country outside the United States has given creationism a warmer reception than Australia, which has spawned an internationally successful creationist ministry and at times even welcomed creation science into the classrooms of state-supported schools.
(CSIRO report, 2002)
According to some media reports, over 100 Australian private schools are already including "Intelligent Design" in their science lessons. Pacific Hills Christian School in Dural, New South Wales was the first.
On 20 October, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation put to air an episode of their science program, Catalyst, covering the ID debate in Australia. The Principal of Pacific Hills Christian School, Dr Ted Boyce, was interviewed on the show.
After the show Catalyst ran an online poll asking whether viewers thought “Intelligent Design should be taught in science classrooms.” 9357 votes were counted, with 34% voting Yes, and 66% voting No.
(CSICOP report, 2005)
Assuming that this tendency is continuing, how do we account for it?
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/17/2004
Posts: 1,441
Location: sydney, Australia
|
Creationism has no place in state-run public schools, aside from elective Religious Studies classes. Thats how I feel.
However, a private school, particularly one which operates under the banner of religion, should probably be allowed to teach what it believes to be true and correct. Creationism in a christian school for example seems to be not only allowable, but expected. It is only reasonable that a religious school should teach in line with religious message.
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/18/2007
Posts: 1,921
Location: Melbourne
|
Creationism can stay in the States and our private schools.
As stated above, it has no place in state public schools.
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/27/2008
Posts: 201
Location: UK
|
Fair enough, but you aren't anwering my question! Why do such a number of Australians believe in this nonsense? After all, most ordinary Christians don't, outside of the USA.
It's not as if there were no practical considerations. For example: whether we like it or not, fossil fuels are going to be necessary for some time yet, and that means we need geologists. Put yourself in the place of a university interviewing candidates for geology courses. How are you going to feel about accepting someone if you know they were educated at a school which teaches that all geology is wrong, and the world is six thousand years old, as many creationists believe?
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 288
Location: Newcastle
|
While I don't doubt the veracity of your evidence, I personally do not know one person who passionally believes in creationism, and I even consider myself to be part of a Christian community. It's not like creationism is an epedemic down here, and besides, one thing Australians do take moderately seriously is the notion that one cannot perscribe to others what they should believe.
There is no reason that both viewpoints cannot be recognised, not differently to how we are exposed to different readings of King Lear or different branches of economics or different theories of phsyics. I think there is also definitional issues with the term creationism.
Does a creasitionist believe that life was somehow started by a divine being, or does it mean that the world as it is today was created by a divine being. Saying there is a mystical / theological demension to the big bang and saying that God (or whoever) created humanity as it is today are two different things that can probably both be unbrellaed under the creationist definition.
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/13/2005
Posts: 5,255
Location: Sportal
|
mabs wrote:
...
There is no reason that both viewpoints cannot be recognised, not differently to how we are exposed to different readings of King Lear or different branches of economics or different theories of phsyics. I think there is also definitional issues with the term creationism.
...
Rubbish. Creationism is a religious belief and has no place in the curriculum of State schools. Scientific theories such as evolution are quite different, and are suitable topics for study in a Sate education system.
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/27/2008
Posts: 201
Location: UK
|
Concerning the "evidence", one of the reports I quoted was from the CSIRO, which is of course an Australian body.
As for the legal aspect, someone once said "Freedom of speech does not include the freedom to shout 'Fire!' in a crowded theatre".
I don't think it should include the freedom to indoctrinate kids with manifest untruths.
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/19/2008
Posts: 288
Location: Newcastle
|
ossie wrote:
Rubbish. Creationism is a religious belief and has no place in the curriculum of State schools. Scientific theories such as evolution are quite different, and are suitable topics for study in a Sate education system.
Yeah, that's fair enough. I never said that it should be taught and I'm sorry if I gave that impression. Having said that, in religious classes, I think its fine... I was more talking from a societal viewpoint as opposed to an educational one (in the sense that its socially acceptable to have an unusual reading of King Lear, or an unorthodox take on economics. What I am saying is that (except in extreme cases where values place others in danger), we really have no right to tell creationists (or anyone) what they should believe, and its probably admirable to admit that there are other opinions to your own even if you don't give those opinions much weight. But schools, because they play such an important role in social conditioning should remain secular, and in the huge majority of cases (to my knowledge) are
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/11/2007
Posts: 6,258
Location: Queensland
|
I go to a Private Catholic school and it is compulsory in Year 11 and 12 to do a form of religion. If you don't, it's see you later. It's ridiculous.
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 12/29/2007
Posts: 999
|
I wonder if Oldpom the Nazi is infavour of removing all mentions of the Koran in muslim nations.
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/17/2004
Posts: 1,441
Location: sydney, Australia
|
Kumara wrote:I wonder if Oldpom the Nazi is infavour of removing all mentions of the Koran in muslim nations. Given that Australia is without a state-religion, I really dont see any relevance in your question.
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 12/29/2007
Posts: 999
|
vieires wrote:
Given that Australia is without a state-religion, I really dont see any relevance in your question.
Though shall not steal..... The relevance has nothing to do with Australia having a state religion or not
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/17/2004
Posts: 1,441
Location: sydney, Australia
|
Kumara wrote:
Though shall not steal.....
The relevance has nothing to do with Australia having a state religion or not
I think it is fair to say that your implication was that if OldPom is in favour of having no mention of creationism in Australia, then he should also be in favour of having no mention of the Qu'ran in Muslim nation states, but that you would doubt this...no doubt due to his left-wing 'pinko' ideas. ...Could be wrong of course.
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/22/2008
Posts: 41
Location: Cairo, Egypt
|
OldPom wrote:No country outside the United States has given creationism a warmer reception than Australia, which has spawned an internationally successful creationist ministry and at times even welcomed creation science into the classrooms of state-supported schools.
(CSIRO report, 2002)
According to some media reports, over 100 Australian private schools are already including "Intelligent Design" in their science lessons. Pacific Hills Christian School in Dural, New South Wales was the first.
On 20 October, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation put to air an episode of their science program, Catalyst, covering the ID debate in Australia. The Principal of Pacific Hills Christian School, Dr Ted Boyce, was interviewed on the show.
After the show Catalyst ran an online poll asking whether viewers thought “Intelligent Design should be taught in science classrooms.” 9357 votes were counted, with 34% voting Yes, and 66% voting No.
(CSICOP report, 2005)
Assuming that this tendency is continuing, how do we account for it? lol i used to go there
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/3/2007
Posts: 6,166
Location: Adelaide!
|
OldPom wrote:No country outside the United States has given creationism a warmer reception than Australia, which has spawned an internationally successful creationist ministry and at times even welcomed creation science into the classrooms of state-supported schools.
(CSIRO report, 2002)
According to some media reports, over 100 Australian private schools are already including "Intelligent Design" in their science lessons. Pacific Hills Christian School in Dural, New South Wales was the first.
On 20 October, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation put to air an episode of their science program, Catalyst, covering the ID debate in Australia. The Principal of Pacific Hills Christian School, Dr Ted Boyce, was interviewed on the show.
After the show Catalyst ran an online poll asking whether viewers thought “Intelligent Design should be taught in science classrooms.” 9357 votes were counted, with 34% voting Yes, and 66% voting No.
(CSICOP report, 2005)
Assuming that this tendency is continuing, how do we account for it? no turf outside da united states as givun creationism a warma reception than australia, which as spawned an internationally successful creationist ministry and at times evun welcomed creation science into da classrooms of state-supported schools. (csiro report, 2002) accordin to some media reports, ova 100 australian private schools is already includin "intelligent design" in their science lessons. pacific ills christian scool in dural, new souf the biggest di ck in da ocean was da first. on 20 octoba, da australian broadcastin corporation put to air an episode of their science program, catalyst, coverin da id debate in australia. da principal of pacific ills christian scool, dr ted boyce, was interviewed on da show. afta da show catalyst ran an online poll askin whetha viewers thought “intelligent design should be taught in science classrooms.” 9357 votes were counted, wiv 34% votin aye, and 66% votin no. (csicop report, 2005) assumin dat dis tendency is continuin, ow do we account fa it?
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 9/17/2007
Posts: 6,509
Location: Townsville
|
I'm not completely against schools teaching creationism, as long as if it's being taught at non religious schools, it isn't a compulsory subject, it obviously is going to be compulsary in christian schools, but you expect that before you send your kids there, if it's not compolsury and a student chooses to take the subject I have no problem with it.
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/27/2008
Posts: 201
Location: UK
|
Wow! Now I'm a Nazi! Kumara's beloved Coulter would certainly be in favour of strongarming Muslim nations in that way. After all, she said "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them all to Christianity". This would be a tad difficult, because the Muslims' beliefs are held more strongly than those of most Christians. Look at the readiness of some of them to blow themselves up. Ludicrous and stupid, yes, but it does indicate considerable strength of faith.
As for the comparison of this controversy to different readings of "King Lear", it doesn't work. Those readings are a matter of opinion. The age of the Earth and the origins of species are matters not of opinion but of fact. Either Natural Selection is true or it isn't The world is either 6 thousand years old or it isn't.
The Creationists dress up their beliefs in pseudo-scientific garb, notably the daft notion of Intelligent Design. The"science" of Creationists consists entirely of trying to pick holes in real science. They present no evidence of their own. Don't forget, they don't even want evidence, because they KNOW.
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Groups: Member
Joined: 9/12/2008
Posts: 4
Location: Here
|
OldPom wrote:Wow! Now I'm a Nazi! Kumara's beloved Coulter would certainly be in favour of strongarming Muslim nations in that way. After all, she said "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them all to Christianity". This would be a tad difficult, because the Muslims' beliefs are held more strongly than those of most Christians. Look at the readiness of some of them to blow themselves up. Ludicrous and stupid, yes, but it does indicate considerable strength of faith.
As for the comparison of this controversy to different readings of "King Lear", it doesn't work. Those readings are a matter of opinion. The age of the Earth and the origins of species are matters not of opinion but of fact. Either Natural Selection is true or it isn't The world is either 6 thousand years old or it isn't.
The Creationists dress up their beliefs in pseudo-scientific garb, notably the daft notion of Intelligent Design. The"science" of Creationists consists entirely of trying to pick holes in real science. They present no evidence of their own. Don't forget, they don't even want evidence, because they KNOW. Nazis wouldnt want debate on the issue...they would just rather ban it.
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/17/2004
Posts: 1,441
Location: sydney, Australia
|
They probably wouldnt care, so long as the borders of the beloved motherland were expanding they would be satisfied.
|
|
Rank: Sports Guru
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/27/2008
Posts: 201
Location: UK
|
"but you expect that before you send your kids there, if it's not compolsury and a student chooses to take the subject I have no problem with it."
Scotty, there's a bit of a difference between a "student choose" and "send your kids there". Young kids aren't usually asked what subjects they'd like to study.
The big problem with the Creationists' attempts to get their stuff taught in schools is the way they try to slip it craftily into the science curriculum. That's why they push all the pseudo science (Intelligent design etc) to pretend they are being very reasonable and offering an alternative scientific explanation.
Not so long ago there was a big court case in America (English-speaking world centre of Creationism). The Creationists wanted stickers inserted in the biology books to say "This is just one theory. There is another: The Bible". The case failed dismally, Michael Behe, perhaps the biggest name in current Creationism, was made to look very silly, and the judge (a committed Christian) described the "science" in very derisive terms.
Come to think of it, why not put stickers in the Bibles saying there is an alternative explanation? How'd the Creationists like that?
|
|
|
Guest |
