Woodworking (rec.woodworking) Discussion forum covering all aspects of working with wood. All levels of expertise are encouraged to particiapte.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
enigma
 
Posts: n/a
Default Do you support educational vouchers in schools?

"Bob Coleslaw" wrote in
:

Is it better for the government to give out vouchers so
parents can send their kids to private schools, or to use
that money to fix up the public schools?


vouchers are a really bad idea. i do NOT want my tax dollars
used to fund any type of private school, especially not any
flavor of parochial school.
i have no issues with private schools, my kid attends one,
but i want my taxes to fix the public schools for the kids who
can't go to private school for whatever reason.
vouchers may help the elite, but they'll hurt the kids who
need better schools the most.
lee
  #2   Report Post  
Herman Rubin
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Bob Coleslaw wrote:
Is it better for the government to give out vouchers so parents can
send their kids to private schools, or to use that money to fix up the
public schools?


On this question, I have no problems. The public schools,
as they are run, are hopeless. The idea that children
should be with their age groups, instead of being taught
to the best of their abilities, whatever they may be, is
antithetic to real learning. Even the idea of a child
being in a "grade" needs to be scrapped.

Also, most of the teachers can no longer teach concepts.
One does not learn to understand concepts by memorization
and other rote material. The not too strong mathematics
courses of most of a century ago have been scrapped in
favor of teaching how to get answers where the questions
are not even known, instead of incorporating the conceptual
advances of the late 19th and early to mid 20th centuries.
Attempts to teach the concepts to teachers have been
largely unsuccessful; they know too much that ain't so.

At this time, we do not have a good idea how to teach well,
so we will need to have lack of control. There are now
very few academic private schools. Most will continue to
use the public schools while we find out how to do even a
fair job of teaching, and I suspect we will end up with
mainly electronic schools, not computer programs.

--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
  #3   Report Post  
Herman Rubin
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
enigma wrote:
"Bob Coleslaw" wrote in
:


Is it better for the government to give out vouchers so
parents can send their kids to private schools, or to use
that money to fix up the public schools?


vouchers are a really bad idea. i do NOT want my tax dollars
used to fund any type of private school, especially not any
flavor of parochial school.
i have no issues with private schools, my kid attends one,
but i want my taxes to fix the public schools for the kids who
can't go to private school for whatever reason.
vouchers may help the elite, but they'll hurt the kids who
need better schools the most.
lee


At this time, NO student who is capable of getting a good
degree in mathematics or science or engineering or
agriculture or economics is getting even a fair high school
education corresponding to his abilities.

The ones who need the better schools need to be removed from
the public schools and taught sound subject matter by those
who understand this, and not warehoused with their "peers".
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
  #4   Report Post  
Hillary Israeli
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In ,
enigma wrote:

*"Bob Coleslaw" wrote in
:
*
* Is it better for the government to give out vouchers so
* parents can send their kids to private schools, or to use
* that money to fix up the public schools?
*
* vouchers are a really bad idea. i do NOT want my tax dollars
*used to fund any type of private school, especially not any
*flavor of parochial school.
* i have no issues with private schools, my kid attends one,
*but i want my taxes to fix the public schools for the kids who
*can't go to private school for whatever reason.

As the parent of a private school kid (and ultimately, I expect, three
private school kids) I completely agree. I don't want to take away my
support of the public school system.

--
Hillary Israeli, VMD
Lafayette Hill/PA/USA/Earth
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it is
too dark to read." --Groucho Marx



  #5   Report Post  
Banty
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , enigma says...



The reason you crossposted to rec.woodworking is......??

Banty



  #6   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

hey...why are you posting on rec woodworking?....perhaps you might need
some higher education so you will know how to post correctly

  #7   Report Post  
John Emmons
 
Posts: n/a
Default

you might think that folks who knows so much about the state of education
would also know how to set their computers up so as to not cross post their
crap all over USENET...
"Herman Rubin" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Bob Coleslaw wrote:
Is it better for the government to give out vouchers so parents can
send their kids to private schools, or to use that money to fix up the
public schools?


On this question, I have no problems. The public schools,
as they are run, are hopeless. The idea that children
should be with their age groups, instead of being taught
to the best of their abilities, whatever they may be, is
antithetic to real learning. Even the idea of a child
being in a "grade" needs to be scrapped.

Also, most of the teachers can no longer teach concepts.
One does not learn to understand concepts by memorization
and other rote material. The not too strong mathematics
courses of most of a century ago have been scrapped in
favor of teaching how to get answers where the questions
are not even known, instead of incorporating the conceptual
advances of the late 19th and early to mid 20th centuries.
Attempts to teach the concepts to teachers have been
largely unsuccessful; they know too much that ain't so.

At this time, we do not have a good idea how to teach well,
so we will need to have lack of control. There are now
very few academic private schools. Most will continue to
use the public schools while we find out how to do even a
fair job of teaching, and I suspect we will end up with
mainly electronic schools, not computer programs.

--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558



  #9   Report Post  
Rumpty
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The ones who need the better schools need to be removed from
the public schools and taught sound subject matter by those
who understand this, and not warehoused with their "peers".

That's an issue that needs to be addressed to the local school board who has
control over the students.

--

Rumpty

Radial Arm Saw Forum: http://forums.delphiforums.com/woodbutcher/start

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


"Herman Rubin" wrote in message
...
In article ,
enigma wrote:
"Bob Coleslaw" wrote in
:


Is it better for the government to give out vouchers so
parents can send their kids to private schools, or to use
that money to fix up the public schools?


vouchers are a really bad idea. i do NOT want my tax dollars
used to fund any type of private school, especially not any
flavor of parochial school.
i have no issues with private schools, my kid attends one,
but i want my taxes to fix the public schools for the kids who
can't go to private school for whatever reason.
vouchers may help the elite, but they'll hurt the kids who
need better schools the most.
lee


At this time, NO student who is capable of getting a good
degree in mathematics or science or engineering or
agriculture or economics is getting even a fair high school
education corresponding to his abilities.

The ones who need the better schools need to be removed from
the public schools and taught sound subject matter by those
who understand this, and not warehoused with their "peers".
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558



  #10   Report Post  
Richard Clements
 
Posts: n/a
Default

my question is who is this wank? and what is he smoking, and why is he doing
it on the wood form?

John Emmons wrote:

you might think that folks who knows so much about the state of education
would also know how to set their computers up so as to not cross post
their crap all over USENET...
"Herman Rubin" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Bob Coleslaw wrote:
Is it better for the government to give out vouchers so parents can
send their kids to private schools, or to use that money to fix up the
public schools?


On this question, I have no problems. The public schools,
as they are run, are hopeless. The idea that children
should be with their age groups, instead of being taught
to the best of their abilities, whatever they may be, is
antithetic to real learning. Even the idea of a child
being in a "grade" needs to be scrapped.

Also, most of the teachers can no longer teach concepts.
One does not learn to understand concepts by memorization
and other rote material. The not too strong mathematics
courses of most of a century ago have been scrapped in
favor of teaching how to get answers where the questions
are not even known, instead of incorporating the conceptual
advances of the late 19th and early to mid 20th centuries.
Attempts to teach the concepts to teachers have been
largely unsuccessful; they know too much that ain't so.

At this time, we do not have a good idea how to teach well,
so we will need to have lack of control. There are now
very few academic private schools. Most will continue to
use the public schools while we find out how to do even a
fair job of teaching, and I suspect we will end up with
mainly electronic schools, not computer programs.

--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558




  #11   Report Post  
Hillary Israeli
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In ,
Jill wrote:

(Hillary Israeli) wrote in
:
*
* As the parent of a private school kid (and ultimately, I expect,
* three private school kids) I completely agree. I don't want to
* take away my support of the public school system.
*
*
*Don't forget that vouchers will kill the private schools by forcing too
*many unqualified minority kids into their classrooms. Just like
*"bussing" in the '70s.

Huh? First of all, I don't believe bussing killed public schools or
private schools or anything at all (i'm not sure what you're trying to say
bussing did, actually). Second, vouchers will not kill private schools by
forcing anyone anywhere. Just because a voucher makes someone able to pay
the tuition, that does not make the holder of the voucher otherwise
eligible to attend the school. Most of the private schools I looked at
have other types of requirements as well - the kid has to have a certain
IQ and/or test score on some kind of screening test, and has to pass
interviews or observations, or whatever.

--
Hillary Israeli, VMD
Lafayette Hill/PA/USA/Earth
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it is
too dark to read." --Groucho Marx



  #13   Report Post  
Stephanie
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote in message
ups.com...
hey...why are you posting on rec woodworking?....perhaps you might need
some higher education so you will know how to post correctly


Rec.woodworking? Hi Tim!


  #14   Report Post  
toto
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 30 Mar 2005 11:21:57 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:

In article ,
Bob Coleslaw wrote:
Is it better for the government to give out vouchers so parents can
send their kids to private schools, or to use that money to fix up the
public schools?


On this question, I have no problems. The public schools,
as they are run, are hopeless. The idea that children
should be with their age groups, instead of being taught
to the best of their abilities, whatever they may be, is
antithetic to real learning. Even the idea of a child
being in a "grade" needs to be scrapped.

And what private schools exist where children are not also
grouped with their peers, Herman? There are a few, but not
very many. Skipping grades is not encouraged in most
private schools any more than it is in public schools and
aside from the higher grades (high school, mostly), there are
no more independent study classes in those academic
private schools than there are in the public schools my own
children attended.

Also, most of the teachers can no longer teach concepts.
One does not learn to understand concepts by memorization
and other rote material. The not too strong mathematics
courses of most of a century ago have been scrapped in
favor of teaching how to get answers where the questions
are not even known, instead of incorporating the conceptual
advances of the late 19th and early to mid 20th centuries.
Attempts to teach the concepts to teachers have been
largely unsuccessful; they know too much that ain't so.

This is a generalization you continually make with *no* proof
that it is true other than your assertion that you have had some
few education majors in your classes whom *you* could not
teach concepts.

At this time, we do not have a good idea how to teach well,
so we will need to have lack of control. There are now
very few academic private schools. Most will continue to
use the public schools while we find out how to do even a
fair job of teaching, and I suspect we will end up with
mainly electronic schools, not computer programs.


We might, I suppose end up with at least some electronic
schools and distance learning. For many kids this will *not*
be a sufficient way of educating them, however. Humans
need contact with real live adults,and with their peers in
education as much as in other areas of their lives.


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits
  #15   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 02:13:52 +0000 (UTC), "Bob Coleslaw"
wrote:

Is it better for the government to give out vouchers so parents can
send their kids to private schools, or to use that money to fix up the
public schools?

Bob Coleslaw


The latter.


  #17   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 30 Mar 2005 11:21:57 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:

In article ,
Bob Coleslaw wrote:
Is it better for the government to give out vouchers so parents can
send their kids to private schools, or to use that money to fix up the
public schools?


On this question, I have no problems. The public schools,
as they are run, are hopeless. The idea that children
should be with their age groups, instead of being taught
to the best of their abilities, whatever they may be, is
antithetic to real learning. Even the idea of a child
being in a "grade" needs to be scrapped.

Also, most of the teachers can no longer teach concepts.
One does not learn to understand concepts by memorization
and other rote material. The not too strong mathematics
courses of most of a century ago have been scrapped in
favor of teaching how to get answers where the questions
are not even known, instead of incorporating the conceptual
advances of the late 19th and early to mid 20th centuries.
Attempts to teach the concepts to teachers have been
largely unsuccessful; they know too much that ain't so.

At this time, we do not have a good idea how to teach well,
so we will need to have lack of control. There are now
very few academic private schools. Most will continue to
use the public schools while we find out how to do even a
fair job of teaching, and I suspect we will end up with
mainly electronic schools, not computer programs.


Nonsense, nonsense, and yet more nonsense.
  #18   Report Post  
Herman Rubin
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Rumpty wrote:
The ones who need the better schools need to be removed from

the public schools and taught sound subject matter by those
who understand this, and not warehoused with their "peers".


That's an issue that needs to be addressed to the local school board who has
control over the students.


The local school board has much less control than most
seem to think. Its members are "extra time", which means
that they are full-time otherwise, and they have all their
meetings taken up with the current administration of the
schools. Matters such as parking, allocation of the budget,
and others like that are all they can manage.

In addition, few of the school administrators in the country
are at all sympathetic to teaching subject matter instead of
their theories of socializing, and not too many of the teachers
understand their subjects.

..................
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
  #19   Report Post  
Herman Rubin
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Hillary Israeli wrote:
In ,
Jill wrote:


(Hillary Israeli) wrote in
:


* As the parent of a private school kid (and ultimately, I expect,
* three private school kids) I completely agree. I don't want to
* take away my support of the public school system.



*Don't forget that vouchers will kill the private schools by forcing too
*many unqualified minority kids into their classrooms. Just like
*"bussing" in the '70s.


Huh? First of all, I don't believe bussing killed public schools or
private schools or anything at all (i'm not sure what you're trying to say
bussing did, actually). Second, vouchers will not kill private schools by
forcing anyone anywhere. Just because a voucher makes someone able to pay
the tuition, that does not make the holder of the voucher otherwise
eligible to attend the school. Most of the private schools I looked at
have other types of requirements as well - the kid has to have a certain
IQ and/or test score on some kind of screening test, and has to pass
interviews or observations, or whatever.


We have to watch out for the hyperegalitarians trying to
block this. I have read that there is a voucher program
for handicapped children in Florida, but a student going
to an academic school could not use this unless the school
would take all children with that handicap, no matter how
weak their mentalities were.

And don't downplay the minority quota problem. Indianapolis
has a magnet school with academic requirements. A girl was
turned down because this would have meant too small a
proportion of minority students; if there was a minority
student who qualified and wanted to attend, they could both
have been admitted.

The educationists and hyperegalitarians cannot admit that
there is a large range of mental abilities, and even if
they changed now, the public schools could not do what is
needed in a generation, alas.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
  #20   Report Post  
Herman Rubin
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
toto wrote:
On 30 Mar 2005 11:21:57 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:


In article ,
Bob Coleslaw wrote:
Is it better for the government to give out vouchers so parents can
send their kids to private schools, or to use that money to fix up the
public schools?


On this question, I have no problems. The public schools,
as they are run, are hopeless. The idea that children
should be with their age groups, instead of being taught
to the best of their abilities, whatever they may be, is
antithetic to real learning. Even the idea of a child
being in a "grade" needs to be scrapped.


And what private schools exist where children are not also
grouped with their peers, Herman? There are a few, but not
very many. Skipping grades is not encouraged in most
private schools any more than it is in public schools and
aside from the higher grades (high school, mostly), there are
no more independent study classes in those academic
private schools than there are in the public schools my own
children attended.


There are now few academic private schools. What is needed
is not just independent study classes, although this is
what I did outside of class, and what my son essentially
did in mathematics below the strong college classes, which
he audited when he was in elementary school. He was home
taught, which was mostly self-study with some guidance.

I do not recall exactly when, but we have had one posting
by a school which did not have students by grades, let
alone by age. If this is expected, I doubt it will be
that much of a problem.
Also, most of the teachers can no longer teach concepts.
One does not learn to understand concepts by memorization
and other rote material. The not too strong mathematics
courses of most of a century ago have been scrapped in
favor of teaching how to get answers where the questions
are not even known, instead of incorporating the conceptual
advances of the late 19th and early to mid 20th centuries.
Attempts to teach the concepts to teachers have been
largely unsuccessful; they know too much that ain't so.


This is a generalization you continually make with *no* proof
that it is true other than your assertion that you have had some
few education majors in your classes whom *you* could not
teach concepts.


There is much more than that. I am not exaggerating about
the "new math" problems; they were well discussed in the
mathematics meetings of the time. I was present, but not
involved, in an attempt to teach better than average
high school teachers of mathematics the basic abstract
courses; these are what my son audited. One of my colleagues
claimed that at most 10% of them could learn the material
under any circumstances. My colleagues here have the same
complaints about the prospective teachers; they were not at
all surprised with what happened in my class.

BTW, at this time, FEW who get BA's in mathematics have
an opportunity to take these basic abstract courses. It
is hard to find out what they have, and they have great
difficulty in overcoming this, if they can.

My late wife taught a lot of prospective teachers, and was
often quite ill after the struggles to get them to understand.
She was a popular teacher, as well as someone who worked in
the foundations of mathematics.

At this time, we do not have a good idea how to teach well,
so we will need to have lack of control. There are now
very few academic private schools. Most will continue to
use the public schools while we find out how to do even a
fair job of teaching, and I suspect we will end up with
mainly electronic schools, not computer programs.


We might, I suppose end up with at least some electronic
schools and distance learning. For many kids this will *not*
be a sufficient way of educating them, however. Humans
need contact with real live adults,and with their peers in
education as much as in other areas of their lives.


If you interpret "peers" as intellectual peers, I can
agree. My son definitely profited from the contact with
college students in those abstract undergraduate courses,
and subsequently with graduate students in mathematics.
I do not know how effective electronic classes will be;
by those I mean regular classes, with the class run
electronically, not by physical presence. But they will
be at least as good as keeping the students dumbed down.

Home schooled students do not seem to have that great
a problem in later interactions.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558


  #21   Report Post  
Herman Rubin
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
wrote:
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 02:13:52 +0000 (UTC), "Bob Coleslaw"
wrote:


Is it better for the government to give out vouchers so parents can
send their kids to private schools, or to use that money to fix up the
public schools?


Bob Coleslaw


The latter.


As I have stated often, if you gave me an unlimited amount
of money and an unlimited amount of power, I could not fix
up the public schools in less than a generation.

This is a time when we do not need a central plan. The
main problem of the public schools is the idea that all
children should learn essentially the same; this was
introduced about 70 years ago, and is now
institutionalized. Most parents who do not have gifted
children would want anything else, and we have had cases of
parents objecting to their children not getting in honors
classes, often with disastrous results.

Unless we can make it very expensive for teachers and
administrators to ever hold a child back because of age,
and make "No child left behind" to mean "no child left
behind what that child can accomplish", there is no
hope for the public schools. The differences in mental
abilities dwarfs those in physical abilities.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
  #27   Report Post  
Herman Rubin
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
toto wrote:
On 31 Mar 2005 14:35:44 -0500, (Herman
Rubin) wrote:


Unless we can make it very expensive for teachers and
administrators to ever hold a child back because of age,
and make "No child left behind" to mean "no child left
behind what that child can accomplish", there is no
hope for the public schools. The differences in mental
abilities dwarfs those in physical abilities.


I want you to pay damages to all those graduate students who
failed to learn anything in your classes, Herman.


Converted to the public school model, you would have teachers
pay damages to those whose mental abilities were not up to
being able to learn, or who for some other reason, did not
learn. A teacher can only supply the opportunity and SOME
help, not guarantee learning, as you are hinting.

I was criticizing the teachers who put obstacles in the
path of learning, not those who did not succeed with all.
I always expect the background with little review, and
will not use anything not supposed for the course without
careful explanation. And I will not leave anything out
because of "lack of time".

As for holding a student back, I have never done that.
Nor have I not allowed a student to take a course because
of not having the formal prerequisites, although I have
advised students, after careful discussion, that I thought
they were not sufficiently advanced for the course. Read
what I was saying.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
  #29   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ah well, here it goes..

Homeschooling is the answer. Public schooling consumes $5K to $10K
per student per year. Homeschool families can do a much better job
with less than 10% of that. Want a HUGE TAX BREAK?. Encourage home
schooling! The side effects will be a better educated population,
more mature young people, responsible parents, and a society that
values the family.

"Outsourcing" the education of children and young adults is a BAD
IDEA.

What are the arguments against?

Can't afford it? One can homeshool for a few hundered dollars a year,
if that; probably nothing if you are resourceful.

Can't do it; ain't smart enough? Learning takes motivation. Get
some. Be resourceful. Ask a friend or neighbor to educate you on
your weaker subjects. Teach the kid to read, and they can virtually
education themselves. Teach yourself something. You might find out
you have a hidden talent your public schooling never tapped.

Not enough time? What are you wasting your time on? TV? Both
parents working? Too greedy to give up your time for the future of
your children? A kid goes to school for what.. 6 hours or so. 2 of
that is recess and lunch, and this n' that. So maybe 4 hours in the
classroom. Probably half of that is wasted away on disciplinary
issues, 30:1 teacher ratios, etc. You can do better.

Live in a state that basically forbids homeshooling? Move.

Your child will suffer socially? Yeah, we live in a society that
lacks so much opportunity to interact. Do you know your neighbors?
Invite them to dinner. How about your brother or sister? Or parents?
Or maybe someone at Church, or community group? Make some friends and
spend time with them.

The school system and teachers are the experts? I want the best for
my kid. What do they know about your kid? What kind of expert
consistently runs overbudget and consistently produces a poorer and
poorer product? That's not even the point. Whose responsibility is
it to raise your child?

Both parents have to work. Probably not. They may have to lower
their standard of living. That's a poor choice of words. They'll be
spending more time as a family, in essence much improving their
standard of living.

Single parent. How come? (There are some valid reasons) Your public
schooling decayed your morals and you made some bad choices? Find
support in your community. Be resourceful. Set a better example for
your children. Leverage your family. Read the above statement in
regards to "Not enough time".

Ah.. this list can go on and on and on. You are either bubbling with
enthusiasm or steaming with resentment. Take responsiblity for your
emotions and actions. Then for your children. Or move to another
country where the governemt will "take care of you". I hear Burma and
North Korea are pretty good at that.
  #32   Report Post  
lgb
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , george@least says...

"lgb" wrote in message


The side effects will be a population brainwashed to believe what their
parents believe, regardless of facts. Most home schoolers are bible
thumpers.


Well spoken. From your bigotry may we assume you were home schooled?


I'm bigoted? Because I don't believe in an adult version of Santa
Claus?

AFAIK, none of us cynical agnostics have blown up any abortion clinics,
insisted on prolonging a poor womans possible suffering to advance their
agenda, handled rattlesnakes to prove their faith, or prayed for WWIII
on the grounds it'll bring on the second coming.

And no, I don't believe the world was created 6000 years ago and fossils
are just god's little joke - or was that satan's ploy? It's so hard to
keep up with all the flat earth types :-).

--
Homo sapiens is a goal, not a description
  #33   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Boy yeah, where we couldn't all be if we just didn't have parents.
No sense getting "brainwashed" by one's parents when we have factual
newspapers and TV to rely on.


On Sat, 9 Apr 2005 09:36:32 -0700, lgb wrote:

In article ,
says...
Ah well, here it goes..

Homeschooling is the answer


The side effects will be a better educated population,
more mature young people, responsible parents, and a society that
values the family.

The side effects will be a population brainwashed to believe what their
parents believe, regardless of facts. Most home schoolers are bible
thumpers.

Newspaper article today pointed out that John Dean supporters are better
educated and less religious than the general population. That's
certainly not the first time that there's been a negative correlation
between education and religion.

And that's what most of the home schoolers are trying to avoid :-).


  #34   Report Post  
George
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"lgb" wrote in message
...
In article , george@least says...

"lgb" wrote in message


The side effects will be a population brainwashed to believe what

their
parents believe, regardless of facts. Most home schoolers are bible
thumpers.


Well spoken. From your bigotry may we assume you were home schooled?


I'm bigoted? Because I don't believe in an adult version of Santa
Claus?


No, you're bigoted because you stereotype and denigrate others.

You're also insufferably ignorant, apparently, of their belief, and arrogant
about yours.


  #35   Report Post  
lgb
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , george@least says...

"lgb" wrote in message

I'm bigoted? Because I don't believe in an adult version of Santa
Claus?


No, you're bigoted because you stereotype and denigrate others.

You're also insufferably ignorant, apparently, of their belief, and arrogant
about yours.


Wow! I guess I've been excommunicated by the new pope!

--
Homo sapiens is a goal, not a description


  #37   Report Post  
Mark & Juanita
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"lgb" wrote in message
.. .
In article , george@least says...

"lgb" wrote in message


The side effects will be a population brainwashed to believe what

their
parents believe, regardless of facts. Most home schoolers are bible
thumpers.


Well spoken. From your bigotry may we assume you were home schooled?


I'm bigoted? Because I don't believe in an adult version of Santa
Claus?



So instead, you believe that, unlike true logical thought, in which, "ex
nihilo, nihil fit" -- "out of nothing, nothing comes" is a fundamental
premise of logical reasoning and scientific inquiry, you substitute "out of
nothing, everything came" in which, with no causative agent, the universe
just exploded into being at 3:00 one Thursday afternoon?

The statements you have made are in no way indicative of the comments of
an agnostic, who acknowledges, "he just doesn't know", your comments are
actually those of an athiest who vehemently denies the existence of a God
or Supreme Being and strongly agitates for the suppression of expressions
by those who do do hold religious faith.

Thus your other comments about those who believe as you have never caused
mayhem in the name of their religion is also belied -- as those subject to
persecution under the Stalinists and the current religious believers being
persecuted in China can attest.




+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
The absence of accidents does not mean the presence of safety
Army General Richard Cody
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
  #38   Report Post  
lgb
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
says...
So instead, you believe that, unlike true logical thought, in which, "ex
nihilo, nihil fit" -- "out of nothing, nothing comes" is a fundamental
premise of logical reasoning and scientific inquiry, you substitute "out of
nothing, everything came" in which, with no causative agent, the universe
just exploded into being at 3:00 one Thursday afternoon?

I find it strange that those who say something had to create the
universe then turn around and postulate a "supreme being" that according
to them, didn't need a creator. Seems like begging the question to me.
Or, as Terry Pratchett put it "it's turtles, all the way down."

And no, I'm not an atheist, if for no other reason than a negative
cannot be proved. For that matter, try understanding the terms
"infinity" or "nothing" - you and I can quote the definition, but our
brains are incapable of really grasping the reality. For example, our
brains may understand the idea of atoms, but tend to give a big "Yeah,
right" when told the toe they stubbed was mostly empty space :-).

I do assume, based on the number of different religions present and
past, that if there is a creator, or creators, that the odds are very
slim that anyone on earth understands his/her/it's/they're requirements
for salvation. Indeed, they can't even agree on the existence or nature
of life after death.

Most people base their religious beliefs on nothing more than the
culture they grew up in. Not exactly the act of a (supposedly)
intelligent species.

--
Homo sapiens is a goal, not a description
  #39   Report Post  
Mark & Juanita
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 08:48:50 -0700, lgb wrote:

In article ,
says...
So instead, you believe that, unlike true logical thought, in which, "ex
nihilo, nihil fit" -- "out of nothing, nothing comes" is a fundamental
premise of logical reasoning and scientific inquiry, you substitute "out of
nothing, everything came" in which, with no causative agent, the universe
just exploded into being at 3:00 one Thursday afternoon?

I find it strange that those who say something had to create the
universe then turn around and postulate a "supreme being" that according
to them, didn't need a creator. Seems like begging the question to me.
Or, as Terry Pratchett put it "it's turtles, all the way down."


What is begging the question is the problem inherent in attempting to
postulate the physical laws of a universe that shows itself not to be
eternal due to entropy and shows itself to have had a finite beginning.
The laws of logic that apply to that scientific inquiry. Yet, in order to
get that decaying, finite, universe, those laws of logic must be suspended
for the creation of that universe, i.e, in order for modern cosmology to be
correct, no cause nor causal agent was required for the initiation of the
universe. No origin for the kernel that blew up is identified, no reason
why something in stasis for eternity(-infinity) before the creation of the
universe suddenly became unstable and blew up despite being stable for t =
- infinity to 0. This is not logical, it violates the fundamental tenets
of logic and scientific principles.

One has to deal with the fact that the universe is not eternal (i.e. it
had a beginning and an end can be predicted based upon observable
phenomena). That doesn't leave a whole lot of logical choices.

No, the concept of eternity is not an easy concept to get one's head
around and our finite human minds are pretty much incapable of fully
grasping what that really means. However, there is much more consistency
to the postulate of an intelligent design than there is to an uncaused
explosion followed by random, chaotic events as the origin of our universe
and resulting cosmos.




And no, I'm not an atheist, if for no other reason than a negative
cannot be proved. For that matter, try understanding the terms
"infinity" or "nothing" - you and I can quote the definition, but our
brains are incapable of really grasping the reality. For example, our
brains may understand the idea of atoms, but tend to give a big "Yeah,
right" when told the toe they stubbed was mostly empty space :-).


Athiesm is a theological term that applies to one who denies the
existence of God or a Supreme being. It does not necessarily require that
the person confessing athiesm prove that concept.

Agnosticism is another theological term that applies to one who professes
that he cannot tell one way or the other whether God or a supreme being
exists.



I do assume, based on the number of different religions present and
past, that if there is a creator, or creators, that the odds are very
slim that anyone on earth understands his/her/it's/they're requirements
for salvation. Indeed, they can't even agree on the existence or nature
of life after death.

Most people base their religious beliefs on nothing more than the
culture they grew up in. Not exactly the act of a (supposedly)
intelligent species.


Given that there are adherents to various religions in all cultures,
there is evidence that many elements of various religions are a-cultural
although some religions are more prevalent in some cultures vs. others.
Basically, there are two religions, the first identifies that people have
to *do* something to earn their salvation. That approach is true in all
the world's religions save one. The requirements may differ among those
religions, varying from the various escetics of the eastern mystic
religions through the jihad-driven warriors of the Islamists, but they all
identify *actions* that must be performed in order to be proven worthy.
The only different religion is that of scriptural Christianity that
indicates that there is nothing that humans can do to earn salvation, they
can only appropriate that salvation by trusting that their savior has
fulfilled of the requirements for salvation for them and appropriating
that gift and promise of salvation as their own. All good works that
result are then an expression of gratitude for what has been done for them
rather than works that are required to exhibit worthiness for that gift.
One could add that prior to the incarnation, the other religion that
differed from the rest of the world's religions was orthodox judaism that
again, appropriated its salvation through trust in the promise of a coming
messiah.





+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
The absence of accidents does not mean the presence of safety
Army General Richard Cody
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
OT Guns more Guns Cliff Metalworking 519 December 12th 04 05:52 AM
Carport pipe support rusted out Dan Hartung Home Repair 0 July 1st 04 07:44 AM
OT- I thought Bush on imigration was evil? Gunner Metalworking 551 March 7th 04 11:48 PM
OT - Gunner Quote Cliff Huprich Metalworking 183 January 27th 04 09:20 AM
Sony G410R Monitor problem (and bad Sony support) Steeve M Electronics Repair 7 July 15th 03 12:24 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:03 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"