• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Creationism Banned In U.K. Schools

I missed this thread. It's my understanding that private schools (for this is what we're talking about as opposed to state schools) are perfectly at liberty to teach creationism and any other faith based stuff. They are just not permitted to set it up as an alternative to science education. The two must be completely divorced with no links and they must teach the science curriculum as set out by HMIE.
 
I missed this thread. It's my understanding that private schools (for this is what we're talking about as opposed to state schools) are perfectly at liberty to teach creationism and any other faith based stuff. They are just not permitted to set it up as an alternative to science education. The two must be completely divorced with no links and they must teach the science curriculum as set out by HMIE.

Absolutely correct...in addition, every certified Private (Tuition), Religious, Home, Charter and Boarding school has curricular, teacher certification, safety and minimum hours/days hoops to jump through...while you are free to teach beliefs and perspectives in your non-public school, it does not mean you can teach the best way to take a federal building down, or how your star little scientists can build a lunchbox nuke at home, using what mom and dad have in the garage and basement...

...many in this post are correct about the U.S. in terms of freedoms and liberties and religious climate, and there are many Americans who are delighted with the security, scrutiny and moral direction we are taking...there are also many who are not so enamored...that is good...that is how it works...for us...and finally, yes, we are a very very young country in the scheme of things...but we manage to do ok in many categories...room for improvement?, absolutment...all in agreement?...nine...

...creationism, like any other -ism, is a theory, because we cannot prove it...hell, (no pun) we cannot even test it scientifically...but the way to the answers is NOT to close doors and windows on ideas and ideology...that said, neither is the answer to let every nut bar idea and teaching right in the front door, without checking for I.D. and credentials, as it were...

Thus endith the Lesson

"Let There Be Hydrogen"?
 
Under Bush an order was issued that any lawyer who dared defend an inmate of Quantanamo would be sent there rthemselves (again, without a trial). That order was kept rather secret. My source is a personal friend who is a lawyer in San Francisco.

I don't believe that. You couldn't possibly issue a "secret" order to every lawyer in America, it would immediately be common public knowledge.

Even more so considering such an order, and carrying out such a threat on law abiding American citizens (lawyers no less!) would be blatantly illegal, absolutely unprecedented and completely impossible to carry out without drawing massive publicity.
 
You've just made the classic error that the UK Education Department has now ruled must not happen. I don't know whether you did it deliberately or inadvertently but your third paragraph is precisely what has now been prohibited in the UK.

[to the guy above Pingfah]
 
The whole idea of "military" tribunals came from the UK which were used during "the Troubles" and are still in place.

No, they aren't. Interment of Irish nationals still had to be under the assumption of criminal or terrorist intent, and could be contested even in the 70's.

The laws where changed during the 80's and 90's and eventually dispanded altogether with the Good Friday Agreement.

The UK Terrorism Act of 2001 does provide certain detainments but only under the guidelines Emilia posted. And those apply universally, no one ethinicity can be targetted, even if they do at times harass Muslim minorities more.

But since the Republic of Ireland is now a member state of the European Union, even if the Irish Internment law was still technically allowed on the books, by simple principle of supercedence, the newer human rights acts of the UK and EU would allow anyone detained under it to appeal immediately and be released under unlawful detainment.

There is no standing UK law other that the TA2001 that allows someone to be picked up, and there are a lot of caveats to that law, human rights must be observed, they must prove terrorist intent, and be released immediately if none is found.

Until we open our own international concentration camp to hold prisoners indefinitely without any human rights such as the Gitmo facility, please don't imply that holding someone for 24 hours in a cushy room is equivalent or somehow an even greater "fascist" movement.
 

OP article said:
The funding agreement defines creationism as "any doctrine or theory which holds that natural biological processes cannot account for the history, diversity, and complexity of life on earth and therefore rejects the scientific theory of evolution,"
One thing that I find disappointing about this is that it is badly worded. It would be more accurate to simply say natural processes. It's simply not the case "natural biological processes" can fully account for the history of life on Earth. Some of the processes needed for a full account are astronomical, such as asteroid impacts, and others are simply geological. That's not even considering the question of how life began in the first place, namely presumably out of non-biological (natural) processes.
 
You've just made the classic error that the UK Education Department has now ruled must not happen. I don't know whether you did it deliberately or inadvertently but your third paragraph is precisely what has now been prohibited in the UK.

[to the guy above Pingfah]

That's me...I want to understand what you mean, but I am not sure I follow you...plus, not sure what the UK has to do with it...I live in the U.S... :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
From the link provided in the OP:

"It does not accord with the scientific consensus or the very large body of established scientific evidence; nor does it accurately and consistently employ the scientific method, and as such it should not be presented to pupils at the Academy as a scientific theory,"
the agreement states.

Frankly, I think Creationism is outright blasphemous and arrogant, even from a Christian point of view.
As an analogy Excel always comes to my mind, a program created by humans that does take care of various manual tasks.

Creationism portrays God as some kind of manufacturer who supposedly created everything by hand. I'd bet he also come up with a program like Excel which is called "Evolution" and which took care of the issue almost and literally by itself.

Bob
 
Creationism is religious in nature, not science. If Creationism is taught in school in a class on religion, and not science, then there's nothing wrong as long as it remains an elective properly labeled as Religion.

If people want to believe in child killing tyrant sky gods, I suppose that's their business.
 
but from what was written in the papers over here I understand that in some US states (iirc mostly in the south) creationism is actually the official scientific theory and that people who defended Darwin's theories could actually get fined or even imprisoned for it.
It's downright scary at times, seeing how that kind of learning is pushed (Thank you VERY much, Texas O_O...).
Scary is precisely the word
 
sorry, can't provide you with any atm. It's been years since I read these articles plus I don't think you speak German. I was just so totally shocked and horrified that the topic stuck in my memory all that time.
 
sorry, can't provide you with any atm. It's been years since I read these articles plus I don't think you speak German. I was just so totally shocked and horrified that the topic stuck in my memory all that time.

Perhaps not coincidentally, it's been years (decades) since the Supreme Court struck down laws banning the teaching of evolution in public schools. It's been years since I spoke German, but not as many.

Epperson v. Arkansas
 
Found a few :) (But most of them in German. Sorry) I can't find precisely the one I was looking for. It was an article about totally crazy laws in the US (like a law in Connorsville, Wisconsin, that says a male must not discharge a firearm when his wife has an orgasm. Or that in Wyoming it's actally illegal to take a shower on Wednedsays whereas the state of California guarantees sun by a law)

This article:http://nibis.ni.schule.de/~igskrons/fachbereiche/NW08/Kreationismus-Darwinismus.pdf
states that in 2005 GWB demanded "Intelligent Design" to be taught instead of or at least equally ranking to Darwinism. And that Kansas promptly obliged.
It's confirmed here: http://www.planet-wissen.de/natur_technik/forschungszweige/evolutionsforschung/kreationismus.jsp
In this article Richard J Harper states that he knows nobody in the southern states (he was born there) who has heard of Evolution before college! http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/17/17797/1.html

This article in English is about how 4 states are planning to legalize teaching of creationism http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/31/states-laws-challenge-teaching-evolution (which goes contrary to a court sentence from (I believe) the 50s or 60s that stated explicitly that creationism was religious and since a state-enforced religion violates the US' constitution must not be taught)
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top