Supreme Court deems "intelligent design" unconstitutional in public schools

Perhaps this will be the final nail in the coffin of religious superstition in public schools? I certainly hope so.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4545822.stm
http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/...oo_in_dov.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmil...chool_District

Doubtful. As long as you have folks out there like Torog, people who without question believe in something that can not be seen, heard, felt, smelt or who's existance can not be proved by science, as long as there are people who have so little of value in their life that they desperately grasp on to something that offers them a better afterlife, as long as you have people who will condemn, even kill, others who do not share their unfounded beliefs, as long as these people exist, this debate will continue.

When i first looked at your post headline i could of sworn it said Supreme court deem itself intelligent by design-and im not even smoking good pot or maybe i am and just dont know it... :D

a liberal court saying this! Oh my! Its only cause Liberals/Democrats dont want Morals being taught in school.

And it wasnt SUPREME Court..it was just a Federal Judge

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myth1184

a liberal court saying this! Oh my! Its only cause Liberals/Democrats dont want Morals being taught in school.

And it wasnt SUPREME Court..it was just a Federal Judge

---

Morals... How can you have a corrupt, lying, cheating piece of shit like the American government teach morals? Morals are for the weak.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fengzi

Doubtful. As long as you have folks out there like Torog, people who without question believe in something that can not be seen, heard, felt, smelt or who's existance can not be proved by science, as long as there are people who have so little of value in their life that they desperately grasp on to something that offers them a better afterlife, as long as you have people who will condemn, even kill, others who do not share their unfounded beliefs, as long as these people exist, this debate will continue.

---

True enough, but in the long run reason wins out over superstition. I am aware of no recent witchcraft trials. Drug crimes not included, of course.

I'd rather see the study of all religions than none at all. I thought the purpose of school was to learn about different things and to get socialized with other types of people.

What should we ban from schools next?
Does that ring a bell?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

I'd rather see the study of all religions than none at all. I thought the purpose of school was to learn about different things and to get socialized with other types of people.

What should we ban from schools next?
Does that ring a bell?

---

Good point, but try teaching islam in school, you'll see Pat Robertson joining the ACLU. Which would be worth the price of admission, come to think of it.

Just watched a special tonight regarding religions. The only religion that would accept everyone was Buddhism. The rest either denied entry to heaven or there would at least be some serious issues to be addressed in the after life. Just in case....kind of hope the Buddists are the lucky winner! :thumbsup:

Isnt Buddhism one of the oldest religions in the world..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eg420ne

Isnt Buddhism one of the oldest religions in the world..

---

They said it's the oldest "existing" religions.

Interesting....I just got the book "The Ultimate Encyclopedia of Mythology". Buddhism is in there under "The Myths of South and Central Asia".
Just kind of shows that the religions of today could very well be the myths of the future.

I've just watched a video called "Hemplands" about the origins of hemp/marijuana in the US. It features commentary by Gatewood Galbraith, etc. and it mentions that hemp is believed to have originated in the far East and it has been around since as long as .......... damn my short term memory.

Maybe the 2 go hand in hand. I sure like the comments on this thread. I too read the news article about the science teaching in school. I gotta agree with Psycho4bud. School is for learning a bit of everything. I'm old enough to say I learned the Bible in school. I don't regret it, but I sure have rethunk my views on it.

I especially liked eg420ne and the idea that the supreme court deems itself intelligent by design . . . . absolutely priceless!!!!

The best teachers for Comparative Religion in the schools would be those that are objective - such as Atheists.

Instructors that believe in religious gobbledygook are not qualified to teach this subject without interjecting their personal prejudices.


click on jc below

I was thrilled by this decision and even MORE thrilled that the ruling judge was appointed by President Bush himself. Liberal, activist judges? Not this time folks.

Lets quote some text from the ruling: (bold mine)

"Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources."

Thank god for checks and balances.

Well, I just thank God that Bush is your leader and not ours. We have enough problems with our leaders without having a leader who is a war monger and a hypocrit!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

Just watched a special tonight regarding religions. The only religion that would accept everyone was Buddhism. The rest either denied entry to heaven or there would at least be some serious issues to be addressed in the after life. Just in case....kind of hope the Buddists are the lucky winner! :thumbsup:

---

Well, the Islam minister said as long you accept "God" then, Jews, Christians, Muslims will all be in heaven. If we watched the same thing, it was on ABC about Heaven?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mfactor420

Well, I just thank God that Bush is your leader and not ours. We have enough problems with our leaders without having a leader who is a war monger and a hypocrit!!!

---

Thanks for rubbing it in asshole ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

I'd rather see the study of all religions than none at all. I thought the purpose of school was to learn about different things and to get socialized with other types of people.

What should we ban from schools next?
Does that ring a bell?

---

The study of religions and the systematic brainwashing of a society are two different things. Children are taught about different countries and the beliefs and customs practiced there. That is education. The morning Pledge of Allegiance, however, is brainwashing (I'm not against the pledge btw, just making a point). The people who want religion back in the schools do not want education, they want children to be taught that Christianity is the "Truth" and everybody who disagrees will burn in hell. That, is brainwashing.

I'm actually not against teaching about religions in school. I think it is important on a socio-cultural level. I spent a semester studying Eastern Religions(Taoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, other) and then another semester studying Buddhism specifically. I'm glad I took them and found these classes to be extremely valuable to my understanding of East Asian culture (my minor). I do think, however, that religion shouldn't be taught until at least the high school level, if not left to college. Kids need to be at a point whwre they can understand it is just a belief, not the absolute truth. If parents want their kids brainwashed they can do it at home or send them to Sunday school.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fengzi

The study of religions and the systematic brainwashing of a society are two different things. Children are taught about different countries and the beliefs and customs practiced there. That is education. The morning Pledge of Allegiance, however, is brainwashing (I'm not against the pledge btw, just making a point). The people who want religion back in the schools do not want education, they want children to be taught that Christianity is the "Truth" and everybody who disagrees will burn in hell. That, is brainwashing.

I'm actually not against teaching about religions in school. I think it is important on a socio-cultural level. I spent a semester studying Eastern Religions(Taoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, other) and then another semester studying Buddhism specifically. I'm glad I took them and found these classes to be extremely valuable to my understanding of East Asian culture (my minor). I do think, however, that religion shouldn't be taught until at least the high school level, if not left to college. Kids need to be at a point whwre they can understand it is just a belief, not the absolute truth. If parents want their kids brainwashed they can do it at home or send them to Sunday school.

---

I agree with ya on everything except for the Pledge. I think, in a way, this is the first real lesson to kids about loyalty. Some of these NARCS should have listened to the words and meaning instead of just memorize and talk.

The big hangup on the Pledge seems to be the phrase "One Nation Under God"....which God, other religions assume it's the Christians God and the Athiests just have a problem with it all together. I think the Athiests could skip a line without having a fit...don't you?

Yep, I agree that people who don't like that line, whether Athiest, Buddhist, Hindu, or space alien, should just skip it. I used to condsider myself an Athiest, until Breukelen advocaat pointed out that I'd have to disrespect everyone else if I was, so now I'm just a guy who doesn't believe in God. In any case, I don't have a problem with that line. I see it as a tradition, that's all. Like wishing people Merry Christmas. It's been in the pledge long before the U.S. was the multi-cultural and multi-religion country that we now are. When I was in school I just skipped it. It never did me any damage.

I agree with you that the pledge is a lesson on loyalty. When I pointed out that it was brianwashing I didn't mean it in the negative sense and wasn't thinking of the "under God" line. I was just refering to the method of delivery: everyday and word for word. Very simlilar to the scripts followed by most religions in the "teaching" of children.

All this "Under God" and "In God We Trust" bullshit started in the 1950's, when the "cold war" was at it's zenith.

With regards to uttering an oath that I do not believe in, I am not going to "just skip it". Although I am "godless", I am anything but a "communist" (see below).

Here is part of an article about the Pledge, from a couple of years ago. I didn't post the entire article - but it's not very long and I gave the link.

The origin of â??Under Godâ?� in the Pledge:

In 1953, the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic fraternal organization, lobbied to amend the Pledge in their effort to galvanize Americans against the country's enemies. The group urged Congress to add "under God" in order to make official what they believed to be essential for distinguishing genuine Americans from "godless communists." The next year, the Reverend George Docherty became a catalyst for their cause by preaching "one nation under God" with President Eisenhower in attendance. The Scottish minister had come to Washington's historic New York Avenue Presbyterian Church several years earlier from the homogeneous British culture where he assumed that, "It was everybody's belief that God was part of society."1 Without the phrase 'under God,'" Docherty said, "the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag might have been recited with similar sincerity by Muscovite children." (This assumes that a Soviet dictator would have permitted his subjects to express a longing for democratic liberty and justice. Docherty also unintentionally gave affront to atheistic service personnel who have fought and died for America in every war when he declared that "an atheistic American is a contradiction in terms.")[/I]http://www.secularhumanism.org/index...ge=phipps_24_3

click on images

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fengzi

Thanks for rubbing it in asshole ;)

---

Well if it is true that it takes one to know one I must be an asshole because I recognize Bush as one. LOL

At least as a Canadian I am proud to say we don't go into other countries picking useless stupid fights (wars, police actions, etc.). If your country is so hard up for a reliable energy source, instead of going to war to get oil, why not convert to solar power, wind power, etc.???

I gotta agree with the brain washing theme though. Too much of that going on in the world. Most of it is subliminal. Notice, that Canadians don't have a "pledge of alligiance". Doesn't necessarily make us better, just different. I don't think your pledge is brainwashing though - it is a sign of loyalty to the nation. I also agree with the comments about religious factions wanting religion back in schools. I've seen how Christians, notably the Salvation Army church, teach the children that anyone who does not believe in God or is gay, bi, les, whatever is wrong and those people will burn in hell. Poor kids! They are also taught that anyone who likes to dance or listens to R&R music is a heathen. That must be tough crap to grow up with. I think basic religion should be taught in elementary school but it should teach the variety of religions available, not just one. Just like kids are taught about diffferent countries, etc. leaving it to high school or college is too long. Little kids ask questions that need answers and truthful answers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mfactor420

Well if it is true that it takes one to know one I must be an asshole because I recognize Bush as one. LOL

.

---

I guess you can't count me in too then. To bad there weren't more assholes in this country. We're the ones who knew not to vote for Bush.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fengzi

I guess you can't count me in too then. To bad there weren't more assholes in this country. We're the ones who knew not to vote for Bush.

---

Yes, but if Michael Moore (Farenheit 9/11) is right, Bush cheated his way into office 2x. How does the saying go? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. Oh well, you can boot him out next time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mfactor420

Oh well, you can boot him out next time.

---

Can? ...no no. We WILL boot him out. He WILL be gone. That's how I make it through my day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mfactor420

Yes, but if Michael Moore (Farenheit 9/11) is right.

---

LOL....And Santa Clause is coming to town too! :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

I agree with ya on everything except for the Pledge. I think, in a way, this is the first real lesson to kids about loyalty. Some of these NARCS should have listened to the words and meaning instead of just memorize and talk.

The big hangup on the Pledge seems to be the phrase "One Nation Under God"....which God, other religions assume it's the Christians God and the Athiests just have a problem with it all together. I think the Athiests could skip a line without having a fit...don't you?

---

My main objection to the pledge is actually the training of children to pledge their allegience to things they don't begin to understand. This is indeed the first real lesson to kids about loyalty, that is the problem. Loyalty should be earned, not given.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andruejaysin

My main objection to the pledge is actually the training of children to pledge their allegience to things they don't begin to understand. This is indeed the first real lesson to kids about loyalty, that is the problem. Loyalty should be earned, not given.

---

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

"We the people" includes the soldiers that have given their lives for over the last 200 years. I don't understand how you can feel that this isn't earned....it's a matter of respect! :thumbsup: