Thread: Rick Perry and Education

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

It is a case of apples and oranges, that's my point. It is true that evolution is science and as such belongs in science class and creationism is philosophy derived from religious thought and belongs in religious studies or philosophy class. There is room for both evolution and creationism in the educational system but they aren't both the same study. Few folks pass in geometry problems as an essay for a literature class.

You missed the point. Who decides how children should be educated? Scientists or parents?

Originally Posted by jviehe

You missed the point. Who decides how children should be educated? Scientists or parents?

Parents and educators should, not politicians.

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

Parents and educators should, not politicians.

Politicians are representatives of parents.

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

It is a case of apples and oranges, that's my point. It is true that evolution is science and as such belongs in science class and creationism is philosophy derived from religious thought and belongs in religious studies or philosophy class. There is room for both evolution and creationism in the educational system but they aren't both the same study. Few folks pass in geometry problems as an essay for a literature class.

ahoy JDJarvis

well said matey, well said.

in either case, the Chinese have to be laughin' at Americans, as they squashed the supporters 'o intelligent design in a complete and absolute way with this statement;

In March 2009, the ultramodern city of Hong Kong became an unlikely battleground in the war on evolution.

In June we began the signature campaign for a public petition to the Education Bureau. This petition called for a review of the new curriculum with respect to its implications for the teaching of pseudoscientific material, and the release of a statement emphasizing the importance of evolution in biology and the inappropriateness of discussing creationism in science class.

On September 9, we received a formal response from the Bureau, with language similar to that of the document it had previously issued. The Bureau stated that "Creationism and Intelligent Design are not included in the Biology Curriculum framework nor are they considered as an alternative to Darwin's theory. ... Only evolution is included as it is supported with evidence to explain the origin of species."

A Creationism Row in Hong Kong | NCSE

them darn Chinamen, aye? why do they have to be so bloody practical?

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

ahoy JDJarvis

well said matey, well said.

in either case, the Chinese have to be laughin' at Americans, as they squashed the supporters 'o intelligent design in a complete and absolute way with this statement;

A Creationism Row in Hong Kong | NCSE

them darn Chinamen, aye? why do they have to be so bloody practical?

- MeadHallPirate

To be fair, the Chinese are also atheistic. They wouldnt be falling over themselves to embrace ID anyways. Hong Kong is a little different because of it's semi-autonomous status, but things like education still are heavily impacted by the will of the Chinese Communist Party.

Originally Posted by jviehe

Math is a unanimously accepted fact, but yes, if a parent wanted to home school their children that 1+1=3, they are free to do that. Evolution is not unanimously accepted fact, however, so its apples and oranges.

ahoy Jviehe,

matey, in 1987, in Edwards v. Aguillard, the Supreme Court declared that school districts cannot be teachin' creationism along side evolution in a science classroom.

since creationism bein' taught in public schools hath been ruled as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, i be surprised ye support such a thing.

- MeadHallPirate