Radical Islam and that Cartoon again..
- Thread starter Changleen
- Start date
i want to make a car emblem like the jesus fish eating the darwin fish but have it eating the crescent moon.
or, even better, have a t-shirt with a ummm...say, 50 cent look alike shouting and have the caption bubble read: "h-ALLAH bitches!"
or, a pic from one of the westboro baptist church protests that reads: GOD HATES ALLAH!
or maybe this:
and yes, i'd wear the t-shirt with the cartoon on it. if you're going to be an extremist, you're going to be made fun of. period.
Like the pestilent, creeping tides of evangelical and fundamentalist Christianity that are working to poison science and thought in the classroom and reason and equality in the courts and legal system? Most of us end up kowtowing the concept that we should "respect" one another's various religions, especially when the "JC" brand is invoked, but perhaps this politically correct acceptance of forms of faith that are actively working to harm our children (and therefore future competitiveness as a nation), separation of church and state and ensuing freedoms, and foreign policy ought to be challenged, debated and excoriated publicly.
seems to me we're a more secular nation now than before, and perhaps this is the impetus for a more ardent evangelical movement, especially with what can be argued as institutionalized minimizing of our country's religious roots, to the point where some offer up that history's being re-written (i don't believe it, but see the merits of the case).
while i agree critical thinking is in short supply from some on the religious right, they don't have exclusive rights to it. refer to the 'defrocking' of steven meyer & rick sternberg for ideological reasons upon publishing a peer reviewed paper which dared to mention ID as a possible consideration. it seems there is reasonable disagreement in the field of science until the boogeyman (God) is even indirectly invoked. the merits of research & analysis seems to be dismissed with all the dogmatic knee-jerking of an academic taliban. not to suggest this is prevalent, as anyone 'worth their salt' will not venture to suggest 'heresy'. if nothing else, so much more can be learned about the scientific approach to the ID/evo debate if these very bright men were more tempered, and not threatening to blow up someone's career for 'offending science'.
as i've oft wrote here, teach ID & evo side-by-side as a means to teach critical thinking. but, it'll never happen, even if everyone's best served.
oh, and a pre-emptive '**** you' to silver
. not sure if he'll take the time to part from his weekender behe-haggard 3-some
I tend to agree with you, even being the secularist I am. This, however, is bull****. ID is not science, never has been, and never will be. It's not testable by the scientific method.
Teach it; fine. In comparative religion, please.
Exactly, however ID is really more of a straw man intended to get creationism inserted into science classrooms on equal footing w/ evolution than a religion of its own. There was a great talk given by Lawrence Krauss, a physics and astronomy professor from Case Western Reserve University, to the AEI (Am. Enterprise Inst.) aired by C-Span that touched on this subject. It's quite long (I watched it sick in bed w/ the Flu.) I found his talk inspiring, but my views differed substantially from the general response of the crowd. Here's a link to it if you're interested. C-Span video Archives.
Would this be the "Flattened Head" approach to education?
I actually agree with you. Teaching ID in science class is a great thing, and should actually be one of the first things done.oh, and a pre-emptive '**** you' to silver
What better way to compare and contrast how a scientific theory works to a fairy tale?
I would agree that in principal teaching ID as example of non-scientific method may be a good idea, except recently it was made clear to me that a sizable portion of the general population also need to be taught to eat a balanced diet. I fear scientific method maybe beyond some people.
(I was at antenatal class - they started doing 'nutrition' - I was like 'WTF?' - it was real basic stuff, 'Coke has a lot of sugar in it, don't feed it to your baby' etc. but there was over half the class like 'I never knew that!' Fack! Wow, there is a lot of fat in deep fried food? Who knew?)
So, licences to reproduce and have a say in democracy - What say you all? I'm increasing for it. Democracy can only work if people aren't functionally retarded.
(I was at antenatal class - they started doing 'nutrition' - I was like 'WTF?' - it was real basic stuff, 'Coke has a lot of sugar in it, don't feed it to your baby' etc. but there was over half the class like 'I never knew that!' Fack! Wow, there is a lot of fat in deep fried food? Who knew?)
So, licences to reproduce and have a say in democracy - What say you all? I'm increasing for it. Democracy can only work if people aren't functionally retarded.
Regarding:
http://acanadianguy.blogspot.com/2008/02/hrriyet-videolarn-izlemet-iin-flash-7.html
(Possibly quite upsetting for some FYI, and maybe NSFW)
Read the comments. Spot the hypocrisy.
http://acanadianguy.blogspot.com/2008/02/hrriyet-videolarn-izlemet-iin-flash-7.html
(Possibly quite upsetting for some FYI, and maybe NSFW)
Read the comments. Spot the hypocrisy.
See? New Zealanders are just as stupid as anyone else.
There is absolutely no need to teach additional disproven theories especially with no relevance in science. Teachers try to cover too much curriculum as it is.
That brings up another topic from "No Children Left Behind". Students need better in depth knowledge of subjects - quality, not quantity. Teaching to standardized test hurts true education and only helps fuel bureaucracy.
Also if you support teaching ID, you are dirty stinking Red. The current administration wants to be just like them: The Patriot Act, Gitmo, Extraordinary Rendition, spying on its own citizens en masse, supporting ID. What more do they have to do to prove it
$tinkle, how can you call yourself an American
That brings up another topic from "No Children Left Behind". Students need better in depth knowledge of subjects - quality, not quantity. Teaching to standardized test hurts true education and only helps fuel bureaucracy.
Also if you support teaching ID, you are dirty stinking Red. The current administration wants to be just like them: The Patriot Act, Gitmo, Extraordinary Rendition, spying on its own citizens en masse, supporting ID. What more do they have to do to prove it
$tinkle, how can you call yourself an American
When I think about issues like these, I tend to try and imagine what I'd want done with my own children if I had some. Of course, living in the south, I can't imagine that any class discussing ID would be anything more than an excuse to try and push christianity on the kids. Especially rurally, where I live. You think Islam is going to get a good rap in Jackson County, TN? I mean really, what would such a class entail? A discussion about all religions? Only the major ones? Or just the fact that science class can't explain what happened before the big bang? That would take 5 seconds. The simple "disclaimer" I always got in science classes seamed to appease the jesus freaks I had in my classes, so why change it?
IMO, if we're going to have classes about baseless ideologies like intelligent design, we're betraying the trust we're supposed to instill in the scientific method. As if the mistrust the conservative right has toward science isn't already ridiculous enough, let's bolster that misguided viewpoint by legitimizing it to the nation's youth. That sounds like a great idea.
IMO, if we're going to have classes about baseless ideologies like intelligent design, we're betraying the trust we're supposed to instill in the scientific method. As if the mistrust the conservative right has toward science isn't already ridiculous enough, let's bolster that misguided viewpoint by legitimizing it to the nation's youth. That sounds like a great idea.
nothing like homeschooling...
what part is bull****? fwiw, i even have silver's blessing. again, it should be taught as a means to learn critical thinking, not as a means to proselytize. you think i want archaeology to be taught by mormons?
I wouldn't go that far. I'm proposing putting it up beside phlogiston and the theories that disease is caused by sin and the moon is made of green cheese.
Actually, that isn't even fair. Phlogiston and the cheese moon theories are actual scientific theories, they are just disproven ones. ID doesn't come up to that level.
Hmm I think school should educate what is the most recent, most commonly believed scientific explenation but should mention that no theorie is a 100% proven yet.
Seperate church and school as well as church and state.
Leave the rest to parents.
Seperate church and school as well as church and state.
Leave the rest to parents.
Yes that is what they currently do in the US. I clearly remember science teachers/textbooks mentioning Lamarckism when discussing the scientific process as a kid.
Nice read!
It's not science. It's not a testable theory. Even if it's 100% correct, it's still not science. It's not derived from science and can't be tested by science.
The scientific method is a particular process which has proven useful by giving us end results of modern products, bridges, buildings, etc. Science class teaches to you to use this method, not violate it. Nor does (or should) science class purport to be your kids' window into meaning or metaphysics or religion or moral philosophy.
reads like you're of the mind i suggested ID should be taught in a science class. to be clear: i'm not suggesting that.
can we get back to cartoons, now?
Well, considering that I said I thought it (creationism, anyhow, and maybe "ID" by extension) *should* in fact be taught in comparative religion class, I don't see why you got on me in the first place...
Ed: Monkey fails to identify descendents...if I could only rep ya...