Religions > Atheism > Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jason Spaceman" |
| Date: |
11 Jan 2006 10:48:44 AM |
| Object: |
Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class |
Here is a press release from Americans United for the Separation of
Church & State concerning the lawsuit they filed against that school
board in California ---> "Americans United Sues California School
District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class" at
http://www.au.org/site/News2?abbr=pr&page=NewsArticle&id=7783&security=1002&news_iv_ctrl=1241
Also, a copy of the complaint they filed with the court can be viewed
at http://www.au.org/site/DocServer/Final_Complaint.pdf?docID=541 It's
14 pages long, requires Adobe Acrobat to view.
J. Spaceman
.
|
|
| User: "Onanite" |
|
| Title: Re: Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class |
11 Jan 2006 11:00:01 AM |
|
|
Fundies are funny ....
They just do not get it. If you want to teach a class on religion,
then teach a class on ALL religions! See ... the right wing does not
want to do that, they want public schools to preach their silly little
myth, and nothing else. Is it just because fundamentalist Christians
have lower IQ's than most people? Can't they see the problem here?
If this class taught Islam and it's myths, these fundie xtians would be
up in arms. They are just so hypocritical, or maybe they are all just
morons.
Onanite
http://onanite.blogspot.com/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ken Shackleton" |
|
| Title: Re: Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class |
13 Jan 2006 09:07:59 PM |
|
|
Onanite wrote:
Fundies are funny ....
funny ha ha...or funny strange.....I pick strange
They just do not get it. If you want to teach a class on religion,
then teach a class on ALL religions! See ... the right wing does not
want to do that, they want public schools to preach their silly little
myth, and nothing else. Is it just because fundamentalist Christians
have lower IQ's than most people? Can't they see the problem here?
They're idiots...with inflated egos that need to be stroked by the
belief that they are special in God's eyes....and better than the rest.
If this class taught Islam and it's myths, these fundie xtians would be
up in arms. They are just so hypocritical, or maybe they are all just
morons.
Both...I think.
Onanite
http://onanite.blogspot.com/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Truman Burbank" |
|
| Title: Re: Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class |
12 Jan 2006 10:45:41 PM |
|
|
The problem was not that the class was on 1 specific religious topic,
but that it was obviously an endorsement of that religious topic.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "nbenami" |
|
| Title: Re: Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class |
11 Jan 2006 12:00:45 PM |
|
|
Oh. My. God. From the press release:
The "Philosophy of Design" course description, which was given to
students and their families in early December, stated that it would
"take a close look at evolution as a theory and will discuss the
scientific, biological, and Biblical aspects that suggest why
Darwin's philosophy is not rock solid.... Physical and chemical
evidence will be presented suggesting the earth is thousands of years
old, not billions."
These people are lunatics.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian E. Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class |
11 Jan 2006 02:14:41 PM |
|
|
In article <1137002445.736461.242650
@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, nbenami said...
The "Philosophy of Design" course description, which was given to
students and their families in early December, stated that it would
"take a close look at evolution as a theory and will discuss the
scientific, biological, and Biblical aspects that suggest why
Darwin's philosophy is not rock solid...
It's interesting to watch how these same people, having failed
to change the definition of "science," now attempt to change the
definition of "philosophy."
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
.
|
|
|
| User: "MrSpooky" |
|
| Title: Re: Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class |
11 Jan 2006 06:07:16 PM |
|
|
It's interesting to watch how these same people, having failed
to change the definition of "science," now attempt to change the
definition of "philosophy."
Too true! I'd prefer to think of philosophy as the "meta" level of
inquiry, a step below science that analyzes the roots of empiricism and
reasoning. While sometimes the line is blurred, there's a difference
between using scientific concepts to take a new philosophical stance
and discussing science divorced from the deeper-level inquiries of
philosophy.
What makes it worse is that again, ID isn't science at all.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class |
12 Jan 2006 06:00:26 PM |
|
|
MrSpooky wrote:
It's interesting to watch how these same people, having failed
to change the definition of "science," now attempt to change the
definition of "philosophy."
Too true! I'd prefer to think of philosophy as the "meta" level of
inquiry, a step below science that analyzes the roots of empiricism and
reasoning. While sometimes the line is blurred, there's a difference
between using scientific concepts to take a new philosophical stance
and discussing science divorced from the deeper-level inquiries of
philosophy.
What makes it worse is that again, ID isn't science at all.
That's irrelevant because this course, as described, isn't teaching ID.
It's teaching creation science.
Having said that, the judge in the Dover case decided, and explained at
length in beautiful expensive prose, that what's behind ID is, in fact,
creation science. Being in possession of the would-be textbook that
had "creation" crossed out throughout and "design" written in - I
exaggerate a litttle - made that easy.
However, ID is supposed to be not traceable back to creation science.
Frankly, just changing the /name/ is not enough.
.
|
|
|
| User: "MrSpooky" |
|
| Title: Re: Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class |
12 Jan 2006 08:41:18 PM |
|
|
That's irrelevant because this course, as described, isn't teaching ID.
It's teaching creation science.
Oh of course. That's the most obvious flaw. I'm just saying that it
IS possible to talk about philosophy with the Design arguments, but
this is certainly not it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class |
13 Jan 2006 06:55:57 PM |
|
|
MrSpooky wrote:
That's irrelevant because this course, as described, isn't teaching ID.
It's teaching creation science.
Oh of course. That's the most obvious flaw. I'm just saying that it
IS possible to talk about philosophy with the Design arguments, but
this is certainly not it.
I don't think the teacher intended to use anything of intelligent
design besides those two words. It would have made almost as much
sense to call the course "patriotic citizenship", and probably slightly
harder for campaigners against it to get public support. On the other
hand, she could have called it "sexual development" and it would be
extremely difficult to discourage the students from attending.
A case against the course would be in trouble if it obtained a court
ruling that ID should not be taught at the school, since I say there
is, in fact, no intention to teach ID at the school - except in the
sense that creation science (Goddidit) is one subset of ID
(Someonedidit).
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Truman Burbank" |
|
| Title: Re: Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class |
12 Jan 2006 10:49:54 PM |
|
|
Sure, you could do it, teaching ABOUT the topic, but i can't imagine an
entire semester of just this in a high school class. When i was in
high school we covered entire subjects like "history" and "physics" in
1 semester, but i guess a lot has changed since then.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Joe Cooper" |
|
| Title: Re: Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class |
13 Jan 2006 11:10:29 PM |
|
|
They have successfully had half of the course taught, with the
probability of it all being taught before a court can act.
Where is the loss to the creationist side?
Joe Cooper
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: Americans United Sues California School District Over 'IntelligentDesign' Class |
11 Jan 2006 03:15:28 PM |
|
|
Brian E. Clark wrote:
It's interesting to watch how these same people, having failed
to change the definition of "science," now attempt to change the
definition of "philosophy."
Persistent, aren't they? They do not care how much they have invert,
revert or pervert to maintain the illusion that Scripture is inerrent.
Scripture is fairy tales, for the most part.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Truman Burbank" |
|
| Title: Re: Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class |
12 Jan 2006 10:47:30 PM |
|
|
It's basically the same thing they did in biology classes, they just
moved it to philosophy class. They don't get it. You can't advocate a
religious topic, that's against the law no matter if it's in P.E.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bobby D. Bryant" |
|
| Title: Re: Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class |
11 Jan 2006 12:16:52 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, "nbenami" <noambenami@hotmail.com> wrote:
Oh. My. God. From the press release:
The "Philosophy of Design" course description, which was given to
students and their families in early December, stated that it would
"take a close look at evolution as a theory and will discuss the
scientific, biological, and Biblical aspects that suggest why
Darwin's philosophy is not rock solid.... Physical and chemical
evidence will be presented suggesting the earth is thousands of years
old, not billions."
These people are lunatics.
ID's biggest fans are its worst enemies.
--
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
.
|
|
|
| User: "TomS" |
|
| Title: Re: Americans United Sues California School District Over 'Intelligent Design' Class |
11 Jan 2006 12:49:04 PM |
|
|
"On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:52 +0000 (UTC), in article
<dq3i2k$iuq$2@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu>, Bobby D. Bryant stated..."
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, "nbenami" <noambenami@hotmail.com> wrote:
Oh. My. God. From the press release:
The "Philosophy of Design" course description, which was given to
students and their families in early December, stated that it would
"take a close look at evolution as a theory and will discuss the
scientific, biological, and Biblical aspects that suggest why
Darwin's philosophy is not rock solid.... Physical and chemical
evidence will be presented suggesting the earth is thousands of years
old, not billions."
These people are lunatics.
ID's biggest fans are its worst enemies.
If the advocacy presented a real intellectual challenge, then
a lot of us wouldn't be complaining so much about it, would we?
--
---Tom S. <http://talkreason.org/articles/chickegg.cfm>
"It is not too much to say that every indication of Design in the Kosmos is so
much evidence against the Omnipotence of the Designer. ... The evidences ... of
Natural Theology distinctly imply that the author of the Kosmos worked under
limitations..." John Stuart Mill, "Theism", Part II
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
