Why must creationism always be linked to the politics of religion or even religion itself?
Because this is politics. People are trying to use politics to put creationism teaching into our public schools. Or did you miss the earmark for the teaching of creationism. Last I checked, that is federal tax money being given for that, which goes completely against the seperation of church and state. It doesnt have anythign to do with personal beliefs or not, the government should not be funding, or help fund any religion, unless its willing to fund all of them. When we have Islamic viewpoints and Buddist viewpoints on all of this alongside creationism and evolution, then I will have no problem, until then, it is wrong and against the ways of this nation as written by our forefathers that the government in any way help support the spread of one religion or religious viewpoint over others.

Firstly I am not saying evolution is not correct, im just saying it should be given as a viable option (because it is!) along with evolution!

This does not mean we must wipe out all evolutionists and this type of thinking, why would we need to do this? This is stupid, we just need to offer it as a viable option (creationism).
I am assuming you mispoke there and meant to say creationism somewhere in that first sentence. Otherwise I am not sure what on earth you are trying to say.

Creationism is a religious belief that goes against other religions and their beliefs, and has no place being funded by the government in a government funded public school. I dont care what its trying to say, and this has nothing to do with my belief system in any way, its just wrong on a fundamental level. I have no problem with the theory, or the theory being taught, but when my tax money is being put towards something that is obviously biased in that it is not being done for any other religion and their beliefs, then I have a problem. I will not let my taxes promote a specific religion and its beliefs over another. If you want to teach creationism, then you need to teach all the other alternatives. And I dont see what the problem is with that, by your own accord you just want people to be presented all the options.

Public schools should not be a place that promotes any kind of religion, at all, ever. Evolution, at its most basic form, doesnt offend any religion, only when used in hyperbole is it ever anything offensive(we evolved from monkeys, rocks, retarded fish frogs, whatever). Any teacher worth their weight is going to teach students that its a theory, and show the problems with it. If they dont, it is not the fault of the theory, its the fault of the teacher, and teh school system.

But as I have said before, provide teaching on every single religions view on creation and life and whatnot, or none of them at all. There are multiple religions out there that do not agree with creationism in any way, shape or form... and I do not think its right to include some peoples religious beliefs in the teachings at school, but not others. Personally, I think it would be great if schools taught a little bit from every major religion past and present, so that people could be more well rounded and have a better perspective.

You can alter the theories, but this can be done with evolution as well as with creationism, im only to mention the number of different Gods people have made up such as Zeus, Brahma, Wotan, Thaw, and the great spaghetti monster to name but a few.
Tell me sir, how can you know that those gods listed there are made up? You can easily see the strong bias you have towards your religion of choice, and against all other religions in everything you type. I dont think you are for teachign creationism because you want things to be equal, it has alot more to do with dogma and alot less to do with any noble cause. Maybe I am off base, and if so, then my most humble apologies, but that is exactly how you come off to me.

ALL I AM SAYING IS THAT CREATIONISM SHOULD BE AS VIABLE AS EVOLUTION BECAUSE THEY ARE ON PARR WHEN YOU TAKE IT IN TERMS OF EVIDENCE, EVOLUTION IS NO GREATER A TRUTH IN TERMS OF EVIDENCE THAN CREATIONISM.
Ignoring your absolutely abhorant manner of posting with caps and garish colors to draw attention to yourself...

Thats fine, and you know what, if you want that, right on. But then I want schools to teach about FSM's version of everything, and Buddhisms, and Greek/Romans version... and every other viewpoint. Because any of those views could stand up to creationism and evolution if you believe that both creationism and evolution have the same amount of evidence to prove them.

But what more evidence do you see for phrases such as "we evolved from rocks?"
We evolved from rocks huh? You sure about that statement, sounds like another one of those horrible exaggerations to me? Kinda like the line that we all evolved from retarded fish frogs.

I see plenty of evidence though, see thats one of the problems that creationism has in comparison to evolution. We can test the theory of evolution, we can prove if its true or not given enough time. We cant prove shit about creationism. How do you prove or disprove that a God created everything around you? Even if evolution is all true, it still doesnt discredit creationism, which is something alot of pro-creationism people seem to forget about. God could have still made everything, and yet evolution could still be true. Unless you are talking about a Chrisitian version of creationism, but I could have sworn you said earlier that creationism didnt have anything to do with the politics of religion, or religion itself.

BUT WHY SHOULD ONE BE PUT ABOVE THE OTHER IN TERMS OF "BEING THE CORRECT THEORY TO FOLLOW?"
Im a philosopher, I think everyone should examine all possibilities instead of just simply accepting one thing as the truth and not searching anymore for answers.

That being said, what makes creationism, be it the chrisitian version, or any other, better to teach to people then the FSM theory of creation? Or Greek/Roman creation? Aztec creation?

If you arent willing to teach every possible variety, then I dont see a point in making an outcry for putting one theory above another.

And what you are talking of is just "another" belief which just happens to appeal to you (evolution).
My religious/evolutionary beliefs have little to nothing to do with what I was saying earlier. In fact, I dont think I once brought up anything that had to do with my beliefs at all. I never stated that I believe in evolution, nor have I stated that I do not believe in creationism. Therefore, you must be making assumptions. Might I ask that you stop doing that, as its rude.

PROVE EVOLUTION AND/OR CREATIONISM TO BE ABSOLOUTE TRUTH AND THEN YOU ARE AT LIBERTY TO PUT ONE ABOVE THE OTHER, UNTIL THEN WE SHOULD GIVE CHILDREN CREATIONISM AS A VERY GOOD REASON AS TO HOW WE CAME ABOUT.
I dont have a problem with any specific theory being discussed here. My fundamental problem with the entire ordeal is that we are taking government money and providing it to spread the beliefs of a SPECIFIC religious belief. And to try to claim otherwise is foolish, as creationism really only applies to a specific branch of religion. Christianity and Judism are not the only religions out there, and plenty of other religions have their views on creation and their own type of creationism, but I dont see you pushing to have those taught.

I just see the entire situation as very... prejudiced. I believe that every person should be free to have whatever religion they wish, and if you teach specific religious beliefs to students in school, you are not promoting that freedom, you are hindering it. You would not like it if someone was promoting and teaching a religious belief that went against everything you believed in, would you? This is the same thing, as creationism promotes the beliefs of only certain groups of religion, and those beliefs actually do contradict the beliefs of other religions. Evolution is independant of religious belief, because it does not try to answer how everything came to be, in any way. A god could have created everything that exists, but that doesnt disprove evolution, they are truely independant of each other unless you are talking about chrisitian creationism.

We must take the positives and negatives of EVERY theory we look at into consideration, this is all I am saying, there is no need to debate with me in regards to evolution being true!
Then you have no problem supporting that the earmark in the bill that was providing money to teach creationism in Louisiana, and have it instead go to the teaching of any and all other possible theories along with evolution?

Dont get me wrong, I agree with you, I think that this nation is doing as poorly as it is lately because of the lack of doing that very thing. The philosophers life of questioning everything and always examining things as much as possible has been tossed aside for the instant gratification that comes from ignorance and apathy.

Others may have an issue with creationism itself, but my issue has been and will likely always be with the spending of federal tax dollars on the promotion of a specific religious belief with no attempt to provide similar assistance to all other beliefs, to teach them on an equal playing field. Granted its a major slippery slope fallacy, but I firmly believe that things like this are the first steps taken towards pushing for a state sponsored religion, which isnt something that anyone should really want. The government should have no hand in teaching anything about any religion at all personally, but if they feel something needs to be taught, then they need to teach everything, not just things from a select religious viewpoint.
imitator Reviewed by imitator on . Some front line views of the war against God. After reading some here I felt this fitting, not so much as a reply but as a dedicated thread. There is a real spiritual war out there against God, and the forces involved know that the "Family", "The Mind", and "Journalism/education" is major spiritual high ground to take. EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed If you have a question about his intellegence and view please note this in His Bio Link below: "He graduated from Columbia University in 1966 with honors in economics and as Rating: 5