Letters to the Editor
-
Unbelievable intolerance
Cary's letter was brilliantly insightful and unfortunately has triggered a surprising number of intolerant, indeed virulent, oppostion. Not what I expect from Salon posters.
So what if someone believes in young creationism? There are many diverse viewpoints. As a just society we debate and discuss.
And it's not like science has "the answers". Science is invluenced by cultural beliefs. Anyone read the "Chalice and the Blade"?!
Some "conclusions" science has reached over the past century:
* whites are superior to other races;
* men are superior to women (bigger brains, don't cha know?);
* bad mothering causes schizophrenia;
* smoking is a good weight control mechanism for pregnant women.
The 18thC English doctor who recommended surgeons wash their hands was hounded mercilessly and eventually committed suicide.
What's underneath this hatred of creationism? Fear? of what?
-
off-the-radar
Some "conclusions" science has reached over the past century:
* whites are superior to other races;
* men are superior to women (bigger brains, don't cha know?);
* bad mothering causes schizophrenia;
* smoking is a good weight control mechanism for pregnant women.
The 18thC English doctor who recommended surgeons wash their hands was hounded mercilessly and eventually committed suicide.
You're attempting to blame science for mistakes corrected a long time ago. That's patently dishonest of you. Are you sure you're a Christian?
Science corrects its mistakes. You don't.
What's underneath this hatred of creationism?
It's resented as a lie, perpetuated to deceive the unwary. Presenting it as some mutant special form of alternate 'truth' does nothing to dispel the overwhelming evidence and simple logic that disproves it. We know there is no truth in it.
Neither are we persuaded that the con artists perpetuating it really believe it. Con artists aren't conned by their own cons, now are they? That's what makes it a lie, rather than just a fabulous mistake.
Does that answer your question?
-
We all have things about which we know very little.
Why not use this opportunity to demonstrate to your friend that what he proposes to teach does not qualify as science per se -knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method b: such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : natural science- insofar as there are no facts {{something that has actual existence b: an actual occurrence 5: a piece of information presented as having objective reality that can be demonstrated}}.
Instead of being repulsed by his request, why not see his request as an acknowledgment of the high regard he obviously has for you and use that as a place from which you can state your world-view with clarity and conviction. If you can allow him to see that what he proposes to teach is nothing more than an opinion, perhaps he will reconsider his task.
I am an atheist and I have a number of friends who are Christians and the religion that they teach their children is one based on love and the ethical and moral teachings of Jesus. To say that these people are abusing their children by teaching them that love is the greatest teaching is absurd in the extreme.
You might want to spend some time in introspection about what's really going on that you have such a violent reaction to this matter.
good luck
-
LW: be glad your friend isn't teaching math class!
He'd be required to instruct the kids that Pi equals 3: see I Kings 7:23-26.
I know, I know, whoever wrote the Book of Kings refers to cubits, not modern measurements, and he got pretty close to the real value, and all the other rationalizations for the Kings passage you find on Christian websites. That's all apologia: if you accept that the Bible is Holy Scripture, dictated by God and not made up by men, then the Kings author misheard God pretty badly.
ALL Biblical apologists cherry-pick, ignoring or glossing over what's inconvenient or just plain wrong in the texts. (Contrast this with science, which identifies and rejects wrong conclusions as a matter of routine). Bible literalists either haven't read the Bible, or read it and choose to ignore the contradictions, a philosophically specious position. Whatever the case at LW's friend's school, allowing these people to design a science curriculum is patently ludicrous.
I'm also dismayed by the statement that because these children are in private school, it's OK that their science education sucks. Is it also OK if they're taught poor grammar in English class? The Ptolemaic solar system in astronomy? The literal reality of demons in psychology class?
So much for Jefferson's idea that the bedrock of a free society is an educated citizenry.
-
Daedalus1221
Reading LW: His friend already knows and already doesn't believe in young Earth creationism.
That is what the fuckups who are reading this as "Atheism versus religion" don't get.
This is not about selling "Atheistic" views, this is about preventing someone from knowingly teaching innocent kids lies that will forever stunt their development. And if you read what LW wrote it is knowingly lying to kids that his friend is proposing here.
You wouldn't tolerate someone giving kids cigarettes and saying it cures cancer would you? The same thing is going on here.
Sure the one guy talking about how "Liberal college professors" didn't crank out a generation of "hippies" thinks he has a point. Except those liberal college professors weren't aiming at creating a generation of intellectual clones and those students going to college are somewhat older than the students involved in this school.
And young Earth Creationism is an outright lie. Its teachings are outright lies as demonstrated by not atheists, not scientists, but by the evidence we have available.
That some religionists on this thread seem to think it is okay, nay, right to teach kids what is demonstrably a lie in the name of "Tolerance" tells me an awful lot about how those religionists think.
Cary wants us all to get along, but there are some things which are not acceptable, there is a frigging line beyond which feelings of disgust and anger are not only acceptable but where their absence is not.
And when it comes to this form of abuse, and it is abuse because this betrays those childrens' futures, that line has to be drawn.
How far are you as an American going to take your tolerance of things you know to be untrue? How far are you as an American prepared to betray every single moral concept in the name of getting along?
This is not about atheism. This is not about religion. This is about the truth. This is about those kids' welfare. This is about confronting evil when you face it, or simply letting evil "get along" with what it is doing.