'Intelligent Design' Gets Bush's Nod

Discussion in 'Fred's House of Pancakes' started by IsrAmeriPrius, Aug 2, 2005.

  1. IsrAmeriPrius

    IsrAmeriPrius Progressive Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2004
    4,333
    6
    0
    Location:
    Southern California
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    In today's news:

    WASHINGTON — President Bush said Monday that he believed schools should discuss "intelligent design" alongside evolution when teaching students about the creation of life.

    During a round-table interview with reporters from five Texas newspapers, Bush declined to go into detail about his personal views of the origin of life.

    "I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought," Bush said.

    "You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes," the president said.

    Proponents of intelligent design say life on Earth is too complex to have developed through evolution, implying that a higher power must have had a hand in creation.

    Christian conservatives — a substantial part of Bush's voting base — have been pushing for the teaching of intelligent design in public schools.

    Scientists have rejected the explanation as an attempt to force religion into science education.

    Los Angeles Times
     
  2. galaxee

    galaxee mostly benevolent

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    9,810
    441
    0
    Location:
    MD
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    ohhhhh.

    please excuse me while i go puke my #$&* brains out.
     
  3. TonyPSchaefer

    TonyPSchaefer Your Friendly Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    14,814
    2,482
    66
    Location:
    Far-North Chicagoland
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Advanced
    Your choice:

    Answer 1:
    I believe that students should be exposed to varoius points of view. However, since science books are stamped with disclaimers that evolution can not be proved (really, I'm not making this up), I think the same stickers should be applied for Intelligent Design.

    Answer 2:
    It makes sense. After all, God spent all that time burying skeleton fossils to milslead the non-believers, it's about time he gets his due.

    Answer 3:
    Excellent. School was getting boring. It's about time they introduce humor into the classroom.
     
  4. mehrenst

    mehrenst Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    439
    6
    0
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Model:
    II
    Obviously, whatever "Intelligence" was doing the design for GWB needs a course in remedial DNA chain writing. :pukeleft:
     
  5. flyingprius

    flyingprius New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    152
    1
    0
    Location:
    Daytona Beach, FL
    This issue concerns me greatly. Evolution is taught in science classes because it is supported with scientific evidence. Intelligent design should not be taught in science classes; there is no scientific evidence to support it.
     
  6. xevious

    xevious New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2004
    187
    2
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    *sigh*


    ...when is the Rapture scheduled to begin? I could use the extra parking space.
     
  7. DaveG

    DaveG Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    806
    6
    0
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    I don't even think that "intelligent design" needs to be dignified with a sticker.

    Let's be brutally honest here folks. The bible is a historical "best of" collection that was voted into existance by a committee looking to forward a religious and political agenda.

    Taken as what they are - a bunch of quasi-historical stories to suggest how people should live their lives - fine.

    To try and put basis in fact behind them... Well, let's be honest here folks - it just doesn't hold any credibility whatsoever.

    Dave
     
  8. NuShrike

    NuShrike Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2005
    1,378
    6
    0
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Model:
    Five
    They should stamp 'just theories and stories; cannot be proven' in the Bible then to be fair.

    Meanwhile, people like Bush obviously don't understand massively parallel computing because that's what Evolution (and your brain) is all about. When you have that much parallel computing/evolution going on, a million years is a very short amount of time to pop out new things.

    Here's a everyday example of evolution: bacteria that's now resistant to antibiotics. It only took what, a couple of decades?
     
  9. rosieox

    rosieox Junior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    12
    2
    0
    Humm... Does this mean W is going to support the teaching of same sex parents as a "...different school of thought...." in our classrooms?

    Funny how when the different ideas fall within his platform it's ok, but if the ideology is different than his, we need a constitutional amendment banning it.

    This guy attended an Ivy League school? I'd be embarrassed if I were a facility member of that school, must be giving out diplomas with purchase of backpacks.
     
  10. TonyPSchaefer

    TonyPSchaefer Your Friendly Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    14,814
    2,482
    66
    Location:
    Far-North Chicagoland
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Advanced
    I was thinking about this on the way home. Here's what I concluded.

    Children attending schools in which Intelligent Choice is taught should have the opportunuty to opt out of those lessons. For example, In Japan, they have the theory of Kojiki which describes the creation of the Earth (Hajimari) and Japan (Sozo) by Izanami and Izanagi. If they're going to force Japanese-American children to sit through a story starring Yahweh, the non-Japanese children should be forced to sit through Kojiki lessons.

    Secondly, teaching one particular religious slant in public schools is simply biased against those who do not believe in that religion. When I think of lessons in school, I think of studies, homework, and exams. When I think of exams including questions about Intelligent Design, I imagine students who do not believe in the theory being forced to push their personal religious beliefs aside for the sake of getting a grade. Our schools become insitutions of religions conversion.

    Science, on the other hand, does not take into consideration a person's sex, sexuality, religious background, ethnicity, country of origin, or dental hygiene when it explains that the amount of energy exerted by an object is equal to the mass of that object multiplied by the square of its velocity.
     
  11. galaxee

    galaxee mostly benevolent

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    9,810
    441
    0
    Location:
    MD
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    sequence homology is a FACT. can be proven. can be looked at.

    an entity in the sky, however.... is a belief.

    i thought science education was about facts.

    GAH!!!! this administration never ceases to give me reason to roll my eyes.
     
  12. prius04

    prius04 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    1,161
    0
    0
    Location:
    NorthEast USA
    Folks, GW is NOT stupid. His comment on intelligent design has nothing to do with education.

    It's about the 2006 midterm elections.
     
  13. jchu

    jchu New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2004
    1,063
    0
    0
    Location:
    Nampa, ID
    The best distinction that I have heard between science and religion comes from Brian Greene, Physicist and Columbia University professor and proponent of String Theory. ' The purpose of Science is to explain "How". The purpose of Religion is to explain "Why". '

    Though not personally religious, I doubt that there is a much more succinct definition than that. I just wish that more people understood this.
     
  14. Bill Merchant

    Bill Merchant absit invidia

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    4,096
    78
    13
    Location:
    USA | Oregon | Portland area | 97004 |
    Vehicle:
    2007 Prius
    how vs. why

    [font=Comic Sans MS:e38f158658]How and Why can tangle. Why did the bacteria become resistant to antibiotics?[/font:e38f158658]
     
  15. hawkjm73

    hawkjm73 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    258
    1
    0
    Location:
    Phoenix, Arizona

    I would like to ask you to consider that from the other side of the fence. For quite some time, evolution has been the theory of choice in the public education realm. It is, however, completly contrary to (at least my own and probably other's) religion and world view. I was required to return the answers as defined by the textbooks, but which I believed to be incorrect. Just as you find this unaccepable for evolutionist to give intelligent design answers, I find it unacceptale for an intelligent designist to return evolutionist answers.

    I would consider it a far better method for students to study ALL (or at least those relevent to the cultures represened in the group) of the potential origins. It would be of no consiquence to you to say "the theory of intelligent design says..." nor for me to say "the theory of evolution says..." Acknowledging the concepts of religion is a very far cry from declaring any one of them to be THE correct one.

    There is a substatial group out there that firmly believes evolution is scientificlly unsound, and will provide volumes of reasonable scientific evidence. Likewise, those who back evolution will provide volumes of equally reasonble evidence. Neither group will ever believe the other's proof, nor should they have to. But, to dismiss one or the other as a fallicy by simply saying "They have no proof, " is shortcut way out that does nothing but make people angry.

    So, I say kudos to Bush for saying this. They more information students aquire, the better. They should be aware of the other theories of origins without being required to pick one. One of the best ways to stimulate intelectual growth is to engage in a real debate with someone who's deepest beliefs are truly opposed to your own. (and by this, I mean a debate with a true desire to understand the other's point)
     
  16. jchu

    jchu New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2004
    1,063
    0
    0
    Location:
    Nampa, ID
    Actually, I probably should have made the "How" and "Why" in bold Caps to make the clearer distinction as in the mechanical vs. mystical sense. As such it is a "how the bacteria became antiriot resistant?" Answer: Among the population of 10 billion bacteria on a petunia dish, a minute but significant number just happened to have a DNA transcription euros that resulted in resistance allowing them to survive and multiply while their brethren died.
     
  17. Bill60546

    Bill60546 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    388
    4
    0
    Location:
    Chicago
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    It appears that evolutional development has skipped the current political class; on both sides of the aisle. We need a third party in the US.
     
  18. DonDNH

    DonDNH Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    1,711
    652
    0
    Location:
    Nashua, NH
    Vehicle:
    2016 Prius
    Model:
    Four Touring
    Who's to say that there arent' elements of fact and fiction in both evolution and intelligent design. I see no reason as yet to dismiss either out of hand.
     
  19. jfschultz

    jfschultz Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2004
    635
    112
    0
    Location:
    Germantown, TN
    Vehicle:
    2013 Prius Plug-in
    Model:
    Plug-in Base
    If you cut through all the "truth" claims that cloud the real issue it comes down to this.

    There is a very real problem with creation/intelligent design that makes it so unacceptable. In order to have creation there must be a creator. (OK that is so obvious that it should not need to be said.) From this it would follow that:

    1) we are accountable to the creator.
    2) the creator has the right and authority to make the rules and tell us what is right and wrong.
    3) we don't make the rules and moral judgements.
    4) if the creator can make all things out of nothing, it is within the creator's ability to grant eternal blessing and eternal curse.

    As the Westminster Shorter Catechism puts it:

    Q1: What is the chief end of man?
    A1: Man's chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy Him for ever.
    Q3: What do the Scriptures principally teach?
    A3: The Scriptures principally teach what man is to believe concerning God, and what duty God requires of man.

    Soli Deo Gloria
     
  20. DonDNH

    DonDNH Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2004
    1,711
    652
    0
    Location:
    Nashua, NH
    Vehicle:
    2016 Prius
    Model:
    Four Touring
    Intelligent design, in and of itself, requires no such attribution. One can ascribe godly attributes only if one wants to.
     
Loading...