On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 09:52:09 +0100, in alt.fan.pratchett
"Steve Rogers" wrote in
:
"Jason" wrote in message

In article ,
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 08:50:26 -0700,
(Jason) wrote:

to believe that an Intelligent Designer created life
and all matter. My faith is NOT strong enough to
believe that people evolved from one cell. I won't
believe it unless someone proves to me in an
experiment that it happened that way. I admire the
amazing faith of evolutionists. They actually believe
that people evolved from one cell despite not having
any proof that it happened that way.

I don't see what's the problem with that. Every human
starts out as a single celled organism anyway.

What some of the ID people don't seem to (want to)
understand is that people aren't against teaching ID in
schools as such, but are against it being taught AS
SCIENCE. If you want to teach it in a class about
religion, most of the protests would go away.

Oh, and ignoring all proof there is about evolution
doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I thought only children
believed the world isn't there if you put your hands
before your eyes, but I guess I was wrong.

If the judge makes a decision to not allow ID to be
taught in science classes, I hope the judge will at least
allow it to be taught in other classes. The evolutionists
don't want it to be taught in any class. They are worried
that the students will realize that ID has more validity
than evolution. I realize that no evolutionist will ever
admit that that is the real reason they rush to court
whenever a school system wants to teach ID in sciece
classes. I don't blame them for being scard. They don't
want their house of cards to come crashing down.
Jason

Taught in other classes - the mind boggles - what has ID to do with any
other classes other than as something to critique in an English Literature
class or as a "How Not To" in a college course for future PR guys.

IMO the only group of students who will believe that ID has more validity
than evolution are those who have been brainwashed by the sort of "sects"
that there are unfortunately in the US proporting to be Christian
beforehand, and as they are of a very small minority the rights of the
majority to a "proper" education need to be protected - you do realise that
an overly religious upbringing of children can be classed as child abuse I
hope

You really do need to go and learn more about your subject - come back when
you can argue both sides and maybe we can all learn something - I know you
will if you really do proper research to achieve this, but maybe we will as
well.

I strongly support it being taught in a comparative religious class with
astrology and geomancy. Children need to learn how to critique nonsense.