Bill Nye: “Creationism is not Appropriate for Children”

[RoJoHen]

Religious history classes are quite interesting. Unfortunately, such things rarely exist before you get to college.

 

[Rhaven]

Soapboxing aside, I'd say the OP's article is correct. Religious indoctrination has no place in school.

Agreed.

Religion should be kept out of the public schools. In most cases, once a child is old enough, they will choose whether to accept the science or the religion based version of where we came from.

Nothing wrong with religion in schools. Actually, I think it's very important to learn about religions. ALL religions. Otherwise you get homeschooled regarding religion, and that's mostly a bad thing.

Okay, learning about other religions is an appropriate subject in public schools. I spent my first years in a parochial school. It didn't teach evolution. Since I choose to believe Mr. Darwin, the nuns had a hard time with me.

 

[Deckerd]

Soapboxing aside, I'd say the OP's article is correct. Religious indoctrination has no place in school.

Agreed.

Religion should be kept out of the public schools. In most cases, once a child is old enough, they will choose whether to accept the science or the religion based version of where we came from.

I have no objection to schoolchildren learning about religions. That's a different thing altogether. Do not confuse them.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Religious history classes are quite interesting. Unfortunately, such things rarely exist before you get to college.

We have one hour a week of "Catholic religion" in high school. You can opt out if you want: you just get a free hour to read by yourself in the library (cannot leave the school, obviously). No social stigma, and no consequences in your curriculum either (the course has no tests and no grades). So what is it good for? It depends on the teacher: some use this hour trying to indoctrinate the students (haha, good luck with rebellious 15 years old), others to explain the gist of most religions, their history, differences, and similarities, or to talk about teenagers issues (drugs, sex ed, conflicts with parents and adults, etc.) I had one of the good teachers, and I really enjoyed the discussions we had (I was already a godless commie). He moved in the last year, and we got stuck with an old nun that tried to involve us in the exegesis of the finer points of the Ecclesiastes. You can guess the results.

 

[RoJoHen]

Sounds terrible.

Luckily, most public schools don't employ nuns.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

While I would be fine with teaching religion as culture (the same way it would be presented in, say, a mythology or sociology class), the problem is that in the US, those pushing for it in public schools really just want it as a backdoor to convert and indoctrinate.

Why not have a comparative religious studies class, in which students study the Christian Bible, the Torah and Talmud, and the Qu'ran? Somehow, I suspect that would get less support than a class simply teaching the Bible.

 

[RoJoHen]

I'm pretty sure I learned more about religions from playing "Assassin's Creed" than I ever did in school.

Actually, I learned quite a bit during the Art History classes I took in college. It sunk it a lot better because I actually had images I could link with different historical events.

 

[marksound]

The same with creationism. It goes against what we know of the world, what we've learned through science.

What if there are things we don't know? What if there are forces in the universe that we aren't yet able to understand? What if "what we know of the world" changes? What if we learn something new, through science, that disputes what we thought we knew and believed to be fact?

Closed-mindedness can exist on either side of an issue.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

The same with creationism. It goes against what we know of the world, what we've learned through science.

What if there are things we don't know? What if there are forces in the universe that we aren't yet able to understand? What if "what we know of the world" changes? What if we learn something new, through science, that disputes what we thought we knew and believed to be fact?

Closed-mindedness can exist on either side of an issue.

That is why the work of science is never done.

That doesn't mean we can't have partial explanations for things. We don't know how life originally began. We do know how species evolve and diverge over time. Just because we lack an explanation in one area doesn't mean we can't explain anything else.

 

[RoJoHen]

Of course, anything is possible, but we should base our beliefs on the evidence currently available. If something is discovered that contradicts that evidence, we'll re-evaluate our beliefs.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

The same with creationism. It goes against what we know of the world, what we've learned through science.

What if there are things we don't know? What if there are forces in the universe that we aren't yet able to understand? What if "what we know of the world" changes? What if we learn something new, through science, that disputes what we thought we knew and believed to be fact?

Closed-mindedness can exist on either side of an issue.

You mean what if one day we discovered that the creationists were right all along? No. I'm perfectly comfortable calling that.

Science has a history of overturning previous misconceptions in science and expanding its own horizons. See relativity and quantum mechanics for two examples in the physical sciences.

So, I really don't know what your point is.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Sounds terrible.

Luckily, most public schools don't employ nuns.

Actually, I don't really remember if she was really a nun or a layperson who dressed basically like a nun. I hope for her she was a nun.

I also went to a Catholic elementary school, which gives me awesome nun powers.

 

[RoJoHen]

Like the ability to withstand being whacked on the hand with a stick?

 

[iguana_tonante]

And elastic ears that don't hurt when pulled.

 

[RoJoHen]

You're practically a super soldier.

 

[Rhaven]

Like the ability to withstand being whacked on the hand with a stick?

Or, the abilty to kneel on a wooden ruler for hours. To this day, I swear my knee caps remain flat, with a 1 inch center depression.

 

[iguana_tonante]

How do you think they train the Swiss Guard?

 

[marksound]

The same with creationism. It goes against what we know of the world, what we've learned through science.

What if there are things we don't know? What if there are forces in the universe that we aren't yet able to understand? What if "what we know of the world" changes? What if we learn something new, through science, that disputes what we thought we knew and believed to be fact?

Closed-mindedness can exist on either side of an issue.

You mean what if one day we discovered that the creationists were right all along? No. I'm perfectly comfortable calling that.

Science has a history of overturning previous misconceptions in science and expanding its own horizons. See relativity and quantum mechanics for two examples in the physical sciences.

So, I really don't know what your point is.

I've read several posts in this thread that state (paraphrased): "If you don't believe that science has proved creationism wrong, you're just a hating hater who hates, and you'll burn in whatever science's substitute for hell is!"

Not that you were saying it, but your quote was handy.

 

[iguana_tonante]

I've read several posts in this thread that state (paraphrased): "If you don't believe that science has proved creationism wrong, you're just a hating hater who hates, and you'll burn in whatever science's substitute for hell is!"

If you don't believe that science has proved creationism wrong, you are not able to distinguish reality from fiction. And the ridicule you should be subjected in this life is worse than any imaginary hell.

 

[marksound]

I've read several posts in this thread that state (paraphrased): "If you don't believe that science has proved creationism wrong, you're just a hating hater who hates, and you'll burn in whatever science's substitute for hell is!"

If you don't believe that science has proved creationism wrong, you are not able to distinguish reality from fiction. And the ridicule you should be subjected in this life is worse than any imaginary hell.

I'm sorry, I must have missed that paper. Source?