It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Louisiana About to Pass Law to Teach Creationism!!

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 08:55 AM
Louisiana needs your help.

I just received an urgent email from Barbara Forrest on behalf of the Louisiana Coalition for Science: the education bill that will allow creationism to be taught in public schools has now passed both the House and the Senate in the state government. In other words, if Governor Bobby Jindal signs it, it becomes law. And then Louisiana is doomed.

So what do you guys think? I think that this bill needs to be stopped now. Jindal will sign this and then Louisiana will be the laughing stock of the Nation again.

So Please Help if you Can

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:14 AM
reply to post by eric52081

Sorry, I just don't see the problem with teaching creationism and evolution. If you teach one you must teach the other.


posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:21 AM
reply to post by Fathom

If the governments want to keep religion out of schools then they should keep creationism out as well. Schools can't even say prayers anymore which is ridiculous. So why teach creationism if you can't even talk about the guy who made them. I don't understand how this is going to work at all.


posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 10:12 AM
do not worry , US will bring educated immigrants from India, China and Eastern Europe when high - skilled workforce will be needed
) .Someone will still have to know how the stuff works!

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 10:22 AM
The way I see it is that the people of Louisiana voted in Jindal to propagate these very ideals. Jindal is quite possibly one of the most extreme christian fundamentalist politicians I have ever seen (he touts no exceptions for abortion, not even in the case of incest or rape).

Thus the people of Louisiana have asked for this, let them have it. Personally I would have no problem with creationism being taught as an alternative explanation to existence. Those inclined to science will reject it anyhow.

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 11:26 AM
Jindal explained his position on this matter quite well in the video here.

I agree with him in that local school boards should have the right to decide curricula.

I don't know that much about ID and personally, I don't think that the theory of evolution precludes intelligent design. "God works in mysterious ways, His wonders to perform."--William Cowper

Bobby Jindal may very well be the best thing to happen to Louisiana in a very long time. Certainly the string of Governors over the last 75 years or more hasn't been that much to shout about, unless you're inclined toward bizarre, corrupt, inept charlatans.

Louisiana has far more problems to come to terms with than the debate between one theory of origins and another.

I happen to be a proponent of the theory of evolution, but I don't like to see the theory dogmatized, either.

Freud dogmatized psycho-sexual developmental theory and while there was considerable resistance to the theory, it did dominate the field of psychiatry for a very long time.

While there are still practitioners of the psychoanalytic model, they are very few in number and the medical model now dominates psychiatry, while behaviorism and psychometrics dominate psychology.

Clearly, this is one area where competing theories were allowed a place in academia and eventually, the better models have dominated.

Jindal is obviously being smeared merely because he is Christian and he supports the autonomy of local school boards.

[edit on 2008/6/19 by GradyPhilpott]

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 11:30 AM
reply to post by 44soulslayer

Personally I would have no problem with creationism being taught as an alternative explanation to existence. Those inclined to science will reject it anyhow.

I'm of two minds on this. If I place myself in a Louisiana classroom and find someone teaching me their religion, which is what creationism is, then I would gag and be very upset. If, on the other hand, it was taught along the lines of "some people believe ..." then OK.
I say this even tho when I went to school we said prayers every day and I was the one chosen to read passages from the New Testament at Friday assemblies more often than any other student.
But that was then, and this is now. I am a firm believer in teaching all the different points of view regarding religion but forcing none. Science is taught as such, a more empirical, yet imperfect, subject different from religion. Schools that try to confuse and mix the two are only prosthelytizing.

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 11:33 AM
Once again this comes down to the issue of the seperation of church and state. How can creationism be taught without referencing the Bible and God? It can't!

If you want your children to learn about creationism, teach it at home or send them to Sunday school. Just keep religion out of the public classroom.

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 01:27 PM
I agree with Gov. Jindal. I think that the local school boards should have the say in what they teach. It is far better that the local government determines what the local people want. We are a land of diverse people. What works in Boston, is not going to work in New Orleans.

I am a Christian, and I believe that creationism and evolution should be taught equally, because it is my belief that they worked simultaneously. But of course that is a personal preference; I think the bigger issue here is the control of our government, over local issues and giving back the people their God given say in their lives.

The United States of America is a huge nation, and I believe that it is unreasonable for one body of men to determine every little thing for the whole. If we would trust the people to speak their minds and institute their will, I think that there would be far less dissent among us.
It is only in recent history that we have allowed such rebellious actions to take hold of our government. I remember as a child saying our prayer in the morning upon arriving at school, The Pledge of Allegiance and then we listened to the announcements for the day. At lunch time, we said a nondenominational prayer of thanks. And that was the extent of “church” in the classroom. I lived in many places growing up, Boston, Washington DC and Utah. The above schedule took place everyday throughout my primary and secondary education. It was the same schedule my parents held and their parents before them.

I believe that this system was set up by the founding fathers, when there were only 13 colonies. We do not have the same values and morals and principals that existed just a short 60 years ago. The people really don’t have a say in our society anymore. Just look at how the Primaries are being manipulated. An honest person has no chance at becoming the President of this great nation. You must be in someone’s hip pocket, and be forever in debt for the funds you are given by the special interest groups.

I say BRAVO to Gov. Jindal. I say give Louisiana a chance to show this nation what is possible when we put some power back in the hands of the people, the local people, where one vote can truly be one vote. We survived with this method for several hundreds of years. I think that we the people may like what we see, when the silent majority is given the chance to be heard. We have allowed the special interest groups to take over our precious land. I have faith in the American people. It is not too late to restore this nation to the values on which it was founded.

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 01:43 PM

Originally posted by maria_stardust
the issue of the seperation of church and state.

Of course you must realize that this "issue" isn't actually mentioned in any law or in the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution only states that Congress can't make laws to restrict religion. Look hard at the Constitution and you won't find the word "seperation" in there anywhere.

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 02:36 PM
reply to post by dbates

Quite true, nor did I imply such. However, the concept of the separation of church and state has grounds for merit. Just as the government has no business meddling in religious affairs, the same should hold true in regards to mixing religious doctrine into a secular government. In this case public schools.

If a certain segment of the Christian community wishes to expose their children to creationism, that's their right. However, they should not have the right to expose it to children other than their own.

Why should my tax dollars go to fund the teaching of a religious belief in public schools?

I would think that the teaching creationism, which claims the world was created in literally six days, in conjunction with evolution, which states millions of years and actually is validated by science, would only serve to confuse young and impressionable minds.

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 02:50 PM
reply to post by eric52081
i think that it is good to teach children creationism im a believer and even if it is fake like evoution it stimulates their creativty way more

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 02:52 PM
reply to post by Fathom

Creationism is a reigious docterine whil evolution is science. The public schools are not allowed to teach religious docterine. You know that whole speration of church and state thing?

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 03:46 PM
I think that this is a very bad decision on the part of the Louisiana government, like they don't have enough problems already without this idiocy.
to all the proponents of creationism being thought in schools, the problem isn't that creationism will be taught (it already is in world and comparative religion classes), but that people want it taught in science classes. think about teaching this in a science class for a minute, the teacher would have to go from teaching about astronomy, geology, the speed of light ect, to saying that all our accumulated knowledge is wrong and everything that was taught through out the year was BS so you did all that homework for nothing.

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:11 PM
This is a tempest in a teapot and it really is the business of Louisiana and no one else's.

Nothing has been said about whether ID will be taught in science classes or not, but even if it is, so what?

Darwinism isn't going anywhere. It's a theory with a lot of holes in it, but it does have a lot of science to back it up. It's also a sound theory that can be used to make predictions about what will happen in terms of speciation and adaptation.


Eventually, the scientific method, the scientific body of knowledge and the fossil and geologic records will reveal which theory is the better theory.

Just because the theory of evolution doesn't bother with the issue of cosmic intelligence doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

The facts are the facts and the truth will be known so far as it is able to be discerned.

Those who would stifle ideas aren't denying ignorance, if you'll forgive the turn of phrase.

I'm always skeptical of those who are wont to limit dialog.

[edit on 2008/6/19 by GradyPhilpott]

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:24 PM
reply to post by GradyPhilpott

I beg to differ. There is a huge difference between science-backed knowledge and religious belief. You can't equate the two. Once is grounded in fact, while the other requires a leap of faith.

It also does matter if it's taught in public schools. Teaching a belief that dictates the world was created in six days as a sort of pseudo-fact is going to confuse children.

If parents want their children taught creationism, or intelligent design or the doctrine of the Flying Speghetti Monster, then have them learn it at home or church.

Or, better yet, present at the college level. At least this way, the students will be old enough to make an informed decision as to which version best suits their personal beliefs.

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:27 PM
I posted this on another thread.
If you want to teach creationism fine, this is how you do it:

"The theory of intelligent design states that an omnipotent being created the universe and everything in it for reasons we cannot, and are not meant to, comprehend. There is no quantifiable evidence to support this theory, there are no hypotheses that can be proven or disproven using this theory, and it offers no predictive ability for any past, present or future events. OK, now let's move on to the theory of evolution."

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:31 PM
reply to post by maria_stardust

Are you replying to me or did you hit the wrong link?

You are welcome to disagree with me, but I believe you'll be more credible if you'd disagree with something I actually said, not some straw man figment of your imagination.

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:33 PM
reply to post by schrodingers dog

I'm curious how you would break that down to a level that children will comprehend. I can already see a classroom full of confused looks!

posted on Jun, 19 2008 @ 09:35 PM
reply to post by maria_stardust

Yes, but they can always ask their pastor/priest/evangelical fear monger to elaborate.

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in