Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
kristus

Texas curriculum reformed to promote Christianity.

Recommended Posts

WOG said:
At least we still have AIDS. God bless AIDS.

And bans. Don't forget bans.

Man, even your user name reads like a slur. Good bye and good riddance.

Share this post


Link to post
MajorRawne said:

You get the best and the worst of the internet here.


There's much worse stuff on the net then some typical fascist nutjob.

Aliotroph? said:

But if he's banned then who will troll us all into a fury? REoL? ;)


What happened to REoL? I miss everyone making fun of his elevator escapades.

Share this post


Link to post
WOG said:

Conservative Doomers are quite a rarity, wonder why.


Share this post


Link to post

Trying to stay on topic.

I think this is absolute bullshit,This is setting the american children on a one way path of misguided history,By teaching the next wave of kids that the UN is dangerious and the founding fathers of america didn't intend for seperation of church and state will lead to a full-out war with teachers.If this goes through,something tells me either

A.A shitload of teachers will leave teaching in america and move to somewhere else

B.The goverment will immediately shut-down any chance of this happening

Plus all of this bullshit being taught to our kids WILL lead to a uprising in america.On the grounds of the UN being a threat to our freedom or the goverment is taxing us too much or even the goverment with make the economy fail by taxing.This will lead to only negative reactions and actions.

Share this post


Link to post

But during the discussions some of the most controversial ideas were dropped - including a proposal to refer to the slave trade as the "Atlantic triangular trade".


Funny - I remember calling it that when I was in liberal school. Cuz like, it was a triangle right? Didn't everyone call it the triangular trade, and learn about how one leg was FUCKING SLAVES????

Anyway, this shit sucks. I mean, I also remember learning about free market economies and how there are pros AND cons. WTF is their problem...oh right, critical thinking.

And just for fun:

someone said:

from apron to strapon.


My girlfriend loves to fuck me in the ass with a strapon, and I take it like a fucking MAN, damnit! Peace and love, asshole!

Share this post


Link to post
kristus said:

WTF? What is all that about?

You've never heard Alex Jones!? He's the original Glenn Beck. He's been around for decades.

And I wouldn't group Jones in with Conservatives. He's against anybody in office.

Share this post


Link to post
magicsofa said:

My girlfriend loves to fuck me in the ass with a strapon, and I take it like a fucking MAN, damnit! Peace and love, asshole!

You go guy. :)

Share this post


Link to post

Never_Again,that was unessisary

What im trying to say is that this will lead to problems and it can't be aloud to happen.

Share this post


Link to post


"My girlfriend loves to fuck me in the ass with a strapon, and I take it like a fucking MAN, damnit! Peace and love, asshole!"

Share this post


Link to post

Texas has Texas History class. Not general history, not US history, it has Texas History as a class. Texas does what Texas wants.

Share this post


Link to post
Gez said:

Well, it's concerns history classed, so at least it's not a topic in biology class...

I'm feeling lazy (been working for two weeks on an essay for UNI) so I'll just direct you to PZ Myers blog where I found the link in the first place. His reaction is slightly different from yours. :p

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/05/what_is_wrong_with_you_queensl.php

geo said:

Texas has Texas History class. Not general history, not US history, it has Texas History as a class. Texas does what Texas wants.

Texas is the largest (or one of the largest) buyers of school text books. And publishers only want to make one book for each topic because they want to make monies. What Texas wants, most others will get as well.

Share this post


Link to post

There was a couples episode of Who Wants to be a Millionaire, and the couple was a pair of text book fact checkers from TX. It was so cute... who else would chose text book fact checker as a career let alone marry the only other person in the field.

Like Sigfried & Roy, who else could find the world's only other gay lion tamer?

Share this post


Link to post

Somehow, every discussion on here ends up revolving around the homosexual male act known as "bum-fossil archaeology". It's like that old gameshow where you choose a starting topic, an ending topic, then the conversation moves from one to the other in a fascinating way.

Share this post


Link to post

That because every thread on Doomworld ends with either bumsex, atheism, Hitler, or all three.

Technician said:

And I wouldn't group Jones in with Conservatives. He's against anybody in office.

True that, but even with all of his "SHATTERING THE FALSE LEFTWING RIGHTWING PARADIGM THAT MY ZOMBIE LISTENERS ARE TOO STUPID TO FIGURE OUT FOR THEMSELVES!", his views are still relatively Christian Conservative.

Share this post


Link to post

kristus said:
I'm feeling lazy (been working for two weeks on an essay for UNI) so I'll just direct you to PZ Myers blog where I found the link in the first place. His reaction is slightly different from yours. :p

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/05/what_is_wrong_with_you_queensl.php

Why is what that bearded whoever says important? What's he saying anyway, that the topic should not be discussed? That creationism should labeled as false even before young people, who may be influenced by Creationism through extra-curricular culture, have the opportunity to judge for themselves? Creationism's encroachment into the domains of science won't go away by preaching the results of science (keeping in mind science is a process, more than an accumulation of knowledge) while ignoring it. It'll go away when sufficient people have the critical fortitude to discard it with their own minds, and the ability to see how such creationist ideology works and why it spreads.

To really see whether they're planning to do it wrong in Queensland, one would have to check the curriculum and see how the subject is being treated.

Share this post


Link to post

WOG totally reminded me of General Duke.

In any case, I agree with Fisk. Religion has got to go!

Share this post


Link to post
myk said:

Why is what that bearded whoever says important? What's he saying anyway, that the topic should not be discussed? That creationism should labeled as false even before young people, who may be influenced by Creationism through extra-curricular culture, have the opportunity to judge for themselves? Creationism's encroachment into the domains of science won't go away by preaching the results of science (keeping in mind science is a process, more than an accumulation of knowledge) while ignoring it. It'll go away when sufficient people have the critical fortitude to discard it with their own minds, and the ability to see how such creationist ideology works and why it spreads.

To really see whether they're planning to do it wrong in Queensland, one would have to check the curriculum and see how the subject is being treated.


Labeling is also important for the general masses. Humans beings tend to attach certain meanings and certain opinions to certain words. If ID is taught in the mythology/religion department, then no one cares. If ID is taught alongside evolutionary biology, then yeah, it becomes a problem. People will then subconsciously associate ID as something scientific. Sure, people who choose to study these subjects more in depth will eventually come to the rational and obvious conclusion, but most people won't. Therefore, ID's encroachment into the domain of science, to most people, will seem perfectly logical and reasonable, even though anyone who probably just studies wikipedia for a few hours on these subjects will know otherwise.

Thus, the problem is that NOT enough people will have the sufficient 'critical fortitude' to discern between logic/reason/empirical evidence and sophistic/specious fabrication. This will then perpetuate and transform into a vicious cycle of willfully ignorant dentists influencing an entire state (and possibly the public education of the entire country), or even worse.

Share this post


Link to post

People are bitching about how the American History will be rewriten due to this. It has already happened.

Columbus always knew the Earth was round, everybody knew it except the corrupt so called religious leaders that just wanted your money and nothing else who made up their religion based on a religion to exploit everyone.

Share this post


Link to post

Qaatar said:
Thus, the problem is that NOT enough people will have the sufficient 'critical fortitude' to discern between logic/reason/empirical evidence and sophistic/specious fabrication. This will then perpetuate and transform into a vicious cycle of willfully ignorant dentists influencing an entire state (and possibly the public education of the entire country), or even worse.

I don't think its clear whether such labeling makes them respect science (or fear it?) or spit on it. The key is in how it's done, and it what sense something is marked as false.

If they just see it as a "rival religious option" as a result, then it's certainly failing. In that sense, even some forms of "intelligent design" may be helping people get into science, as opposed to rejecting it (even more.) People do have reasons to act like they do, even when it's irrational. (The laws of physics and chemistry probably back this, although it's beyond our means to determine it, so we have to stick to mere economics and psychology :p) Reasons include social reasons, as well as the fact that science may not be addressing things that well. A careless labeling is like preemptive warfare. Sure, we know they're antagonistic and they'll be coming one way or another, but by being hasty and by generalizing we end up wronging them and thus fueling their cause.

Their issues are primarily political, and if they see a political move that swipes aside the expression of their concerns, they'll fight back with more initiative and resolution than they would have in the first place. Treat madmen without any concern for their concerns, and they'll just go crazier. Treat your wife's whims as nonsense, and you may need a divorce. Addressing dogma without addressing its causes is madness. Science may be very consequent and practical, but it doesn't give a political green card.

This issue is similar to the phenomenon of "terrorism" and likely shares some of its roots.

Share this post


Link to post
myk said:

I don't think its clear whether such labeling makes them respect science (or fear it?) or spit on it. The key is in how it's done, and it what sense something is marked as false.

If they just see it as a "rival religious option" as a result, then it's certainly failing. In that sense, even some forms of "intelligent design" may be helping people get into science, as opposed to rejecting it (even more.) People do have reasons to act like they do, even when it's irrational. (The laws of physics and chemistry probably back this, although it's beyond our means to determine it, so we have to stick to mere economics and psychology :p) Reasons include social reasons, as well as the fact that science may not be addressing things that well. A careless labeling is like preemptive warfare. Sure, we know they're antagonistic and they'll be coming one way or another, but by being hasty and by generalizing we end up wronging them and thus fueling their cause.

Their issues are primarily political, and if they see a political move that swipes aside the expression of their concerns, they'll fight back with more initiative and resolution than they would have in the first place. Treat madmen without any concern for their concerns, and they'll just go crazier. Treat your wife's whims as nonsense, and you may need a divorce. Addressing dogma without addressing its causes is madness. Science may be very consequent and practical, but it doesn't give a political green card.

This issue is similar to the phenomenon of "terrorism" and likely shares some of its roots.


I do agree that this modern phenomena of scientists believing that they hold the key to absolute truth is quite delusional, but on the other hand, something that has almost been universally denounced as pseudoscience has no place in an actual science classroom.

As with in the other thread, I have no problem with the teaching of ID in a comparative religion class, a history class, or a philosophy class (especially a philosophy class). Kids can then understand the basic principles behind the ideas that support ID/Creationism or religion in general, and learn more. Teaching it in a science classroom, however, has larger and more dire consequences that will probably have an overall negative net effect on education.

Share this post


Link to post

One of my problems with ID is that, despite the fact that it is nothing more than an American political device (not a religion), it is starting to gain credence as something worth discussing elsewhere on the planet simply because it is being discussed so often in the US.

At least, for the moment, it is my impression that most western cultures think that the US is a bit weird for ID to be such a big issue and indeed that there was a perceived need in the US to invent ID in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×