Reasonable said:
richardhutnik said:
Reasonable said:
Everything else up about politics when you force people to live together, and pool resources. In the case of creationism, you have religious parents who want to raise their kids certain ways, and are forced into the public school system and have their kids taught, for financial reasons. If you were to get those kids out of the public school system, then you wouldn't see creationism brought in. Of course, when this is mentioned as an option, the kids of religious parents suddenly become wards of the state in the minds of some people, who then insist that ALL kids must be taught this and that in society. Yes, there are people who want to know God did it, and want evidence to support this belief. I guess someone who is a secular and collectivist would then feel insistent there needs to be a war won, and we get rid of all this "fairy tales".
So, don't let people go off and do their own thing, expect them to subject you to things that violate your own sensibilities.
|
The problem from my point of view is simple. Being taught evolution is like being taught 2 2=4 or that the Universe would seem to be billions of years old or that the Earth orbits the sun. It is correct and should be understood equally as an observable, measurable element of our world.
Evolution is in line with Galileo observing the Earth isn't the centre of the Universe whereas Creationism is merely a response in line with those who would lock up Galileo and enforce continued belief in something that would now appear, with the latest evidence to be false. Creationism is about denying and ignoring evidence based purely on religious belief.
|
It doesn't matter what you think here, or even how much close to what you see evolution is to reality. There is the issue of parential rights on what their kids are taught. So long as you force kids of religious parents to subject their kids to public schools, you are going to have to want them either not taught evolution, or be able to be taught something that is compatible with their religious beliefs. If you don't like this, then enable the parents to take their kids out of the school system. This is about parential rights. Their kids are not your kids, and you are to have no say in what they are to be taught.
It is simple, enable them to get out of the system if they don't like evolution, then you don't need to worry about it. And that is why it is politics. Again, if you don't like it, you need to propose an alternative ethics system to one based on rights. Good luck getting that past the body politic here.
Next up comes, "But but... test scores of America, yadda yadda yadda".
|
One last response.
This is an age old problem. The simple fact is that, in the end, unless there is some sort of consistency then standards will fall and if taken to the extreme the society will simply fail... a nice example of social evolution in a sense.
From my perspective, I don't live in America but Europe, and so far I'm happier with our approach to this aspect of edcucation than America's... although there's plenty else I could find fault with too with our methods.
But again, that's because our societies aren't in some mythical 'final' perfect state. They are in transition as everything is, and in the long run they will either prosper or fail based on how well they adapt to the needs of survivial.
|
When you take theories connected to evolution in biology, and try to connect them to other areas, you get some conclusions that end up being pretty ugly for the other disciplines you apply them to. I am NOT saying that you can't, just that eugentics and economic Darwinism (survival of the fitest) were they byproducts of people trying to take the theory of evolution and aplly it elsewhere.
And yes, societies do face issues of needing common standards, or else they will have problems. Conservatives, or even modern liberals, driven by the need for some form of collectivism in some part of society, will end up agreeing to this. Of course, when you do this, and say it MUST come from the government, then you are going to have a culture clash that will subject the children of religious parents to beliefs they disagree with, and in other areas, see people who aren't religious be subjected to prayer. And this clash of culture doesn't show any sign of being resolved with reason either. There is not set proofs that can be offered to resolve these.
What has worked relatively well is the U.S Constitution, and the ability for people to control who they assemble with or not. Individuals have a right to do and believe what they want, so long as others aren't harmed. By letting people go off on their own, you get them out of the system. Of course, the framework of American society has been taxed by it becoming increasingly multi-cultural. It is easier to grant freedom when people have a common set of values, than when they aren't in conflict. Of course, to then support relativism is to end up putting truth in the same realm as dross, and that isn't good.
Yes, it is an age-old problem. The conflict in America is now growing and tries to have it resolve itself by having things fit into two colors: red or blue. Of course, white or purple aren't considered options, because that makes things too complicated.
