Top home-school texts dismiss Darwin, evolution

Originally posted by Maslo
No, you CANNOT vote on what your child learns, unless you have a PhD in that subject. There is no place for democracy in science. Science is a dictatorship of scientists.

Do whatever you want in home, but state has a right to teach your child current scientific consensus, including evolution.

Well said, sir!

Some people seem to think their children are their property, to raise and miseducate as they please. They could not be more wrong.

reply to post by DJW001

Everyone is entitled to their faith. The concern that some have about home schooling is that the parents will stifle their children emotionally and intellectually. Being raised in relative isolation and socializing only with a peer group that is selected by the parents can make dealing with adult society difficult. Much of what is learned in school, whether public or parochial, is how to negotiate social interactions without a parent's authority.

Not always true. My son is far more social now than he was when he attended public school because I can teach twice as much in half the time. He belongs to several peer group that he chose & not one of them is even remotely religous.

Religion plays a very minor part in his education & is addressed as it pertains to what he is learning. Religions are part of the history of man & avoiding them in education is wrong IMO.

Also, doesn't public school verses private school,, verses school districts already socially segregate children somewhat? I mean, if you are rich, your children will likely go to a private school with other wealthy children. If you are a farmer, your kids will likely go to school with others who have farmers for parents because it is a rural area. (Like-minded people)
My point is, should the parents have a hand in selecting the childs peer group or should we leave it up to things like income or zip code?

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by Conclusion

 

LOL. So I always wondered who was in charge of telling me what I can and cannot do. To you it is unfounded just as to me evolution is unfounded. Don't get your panties in bunch. Let the people vote on it. Or are you one of those people who think you know best for everyone else. How about you teach you kids what you want and we peacefully allow other people to teach their kids what they want.

Ok. Here is the problem.

No, you CANNOT vote on what your child learns, unless you have a PhD in that subject. There is no place for democracy in science. Science is a dictatorship of scientists.

Do whatever you want in home, but state has a right to teach your child current scientific consensus, including evolution.

Ahh. I see. An elitist also. I have these degrees and learned everything they told me to learn so I know more of what they said to know so I know what is best..ect..ect..lol. Come on. Do you even have a kid(s).

Originally posted by Astyanax

Originally posted by Maslo
No, you CANNOT vote on what your child learns, unless you have a PhD in that subject. There is no place for democracy in science. Science is a dictatorship of scientists.

Do whatever you want in home, but state has a right to teach your child current scientific consensus, including evolution.

Well said, sir!

Some people seem to think their children are their property, to raise and miseducate as they please. They could not be more wrong.

Oh the old property argument. Well I could just reverse it and say they are not the property of our government either.

Oh by the way you spelled miss-educate wrong. lol. wow.
Your education scares me.

[edit on 7-3-2010 by Conclusion]

you dont solve a standard test in bio chemistry by reciting passages from the book of "insert name"

nor do you solve at what speed must you be driving at for blood red eyes to appare blue before the traffic cop as you drive by , ..



seams to me people have Hypothesis and Theory mixed up all together which is bad/sloppy science in it self

reply to post by mamabeth


I'm not aware of any state that requires a college degree or even a high school diploma to home-school your children.

Conclusion - Children are not the property of their parents, therefore parents have a right to teach them creationism, but have NO RIGHT to forbid them learning about evolution.

Children are also not a property of state, therefore state HAS A RIGHT to teach them evolution, and every other thing in currriculum, but has no right to forbid them learning about creationism.

Get it?

I noticed you use a phrase "own a child" often, and it is truly strange. Child is not a thing, NOONE owns it, including parents!


I will again try to explain it this way:

A parent has no right to forbid his children learn reading.
A parent has no right to forbid his children learn newtons laws of motion.
A parent ha no right to forbid his children learn evolution.

I cannot write it down more simplified....


[edit on 7-3-2010 by Maslo]

reply to post by Astyanax

Some people seem to think their children are their property, to raise and miseducate as they please. They could not be more wrong.

This is the scariest statement I have read on these boards in a long time. I assume that you believe that the Government should raise and educate a parents child as they please?

reply to post by harvib


I don't think either or should have full rights.

Being parents doesn't make someone the right person to raise a child, and the government is a structured system of rules and regulations, and people tend to get lost in the mix.

reply to post by Maslo

I am not a hypocrite. If the situation would be reversed - creationism would be mainstream theory considered true by a majority of scientists, and evolutionism a fringe theory embraced just by me and a few lunatics, my stance would be the same - teach my child current scientific consensus in school, and I would teach him evolution at home.

LOL. How about let people believe in whatever makes them happy. You know don't tell anyone else how to live, just like you don't want to be told. It is as simple as that. Your acting as if you have something against someone who wants to believe in something good, and decent, and have hope. If you want your child to learn evolution teach it to him. That is fine by me. Like I said earlier it has it's good points. I don't need any scientist telling me I can't teach my child about Christ, my Lord. A hope embraced by me and, I do believe, a few more friends than you have.

Tell me then, who should determine what a child should learn? In my honest opinion, not the parents, but scientists.

Why not parents? So I see. You believe scientists have all the answers and knows what's best for someone they don't even know or love? I love my children. What I would teach my children is the truth.

Being a parent brings plenty of responsibilities, but little rights. And parents certainly do not have a right to exclude anything from science class.

I happen to agree with you here. I think they should learn hardcore, proven, science. I am not to sure what the theory of evolution would really bring to a person's life but confusion, with all the holes in it. So that should be up to the parent. I am not sure if it would affect a child's life whatsoever in getting a job in any field other than science, and only certain fields of that. If he is interested in it, then teach it to him.

reply to post by Conclusion

I happen to agree with you here. I think they should learn hardcore, proven, science. I am not to sure what the theory of evolution would really bring to a person's life but confusion, with all the holes in it. So that should be up to the parent. I am not sure if it would affect a child's life whatsoever in getting a job in any field other than science, and only certain fields of that. If he is interested in it, then teach it to him.

This is where I strongly disagree.

Children should learn everything about a given subject, and they themselves should then choose what to believe.
Not the parents, not the state, but a child himself is the only one to make an opinion about lifes development, and A CHILD HAS A GODDAMN RIGHT to learn about evolution, for one simple reason - an overwhelming majority of biologists consider it true.

Not teaching a child current scientific consensus about biology, maths, physics etc. is a crime, and it should be a crime.

Then, when a child knows what scientists consider true, then you can teach him what you consider true.

reply to post by Maslo

Conclusion - Children are not the property of their parents, therefore parents have a right to teach them creationism, but have NO RIGHT to forbid them learning about evolution.

Please state where I said my child is my property. My child is my gift. Not your gift. Mine. Not the governments gift. Mine. I never once stated that I forbid my children to learn about evolution. Not getting your message.

Children are also not a property of state, therefore state HAS A RIGHT to teach them evolution, and every other thing in currriculum, but has no right to forbid them learning about creationism.

Yes in public funded schools.

Get it?

lol. Golly Sheriff Griffith. What ever do you mean. lol. I have always understood that.

I noticed you use a phrase "own a child" often, and it is truly strange. Child is not a thing, NOONE owns it, including parents!

I noticed you use a phrase "own a child" often, and it is truly strange. Child is not a thing, NOONE owns it, including parents!

I have just went through my post's to try and find what you are talking about and can't seem to find it. Please post a link so I can point out the error in your judgment. I hope it is more than 2 or 3 since you used the term often.

I will again try to explain it this way:

Oh thank you ole foolish pupil.

A parent has no right to forbid his children learn reading.

(Gasp) YOUR JOKING!!!! (sarcasm) I do love sarcasm.

A parent has no right to forbid his children learn newtons laws of motion.

Should they teach them to learn to put the ---to--- in-between children and learn?

A parent ha no right to forbid his children learn evolution.

lol. You misspelled has. Sorry. I am really not a stickler for things like that but with all your opinions on what a child should learn I guess spelling and grammar isn't one of them. I don't like spelling and grammar either though just to be fair.

I cannot write it down more simplified..

(Thinking to self---Don't do it. Don't do it. Oh who am I kidding.) A sentence ends will only one period.

But I believe that I said leave it up to the parents to teach their children what they deem is appropriate for them. Sorry. I believe parents should have all the rights, unless it is harmful to the child.

reply to post by Maslo

This is where I strongly disagree. Children should learn everything about a given subject, and they themselves should then choose what to believe. Not the parents, not the state, but a child himself is the only one to make an opinion about lifes development, and A CHILD HAS A GODDAMN RIGHT to learn about evolution, for one simple reason - an overwhelming majority of biologists consider it true. Not teaching a child current scientific consensus about biology, maths, physics etc. is a crime, and it should be a crime. Then, when a child knows what scientists consider true, then you can teach him what you consider true.

Yes if a child shows interest in any subject he should be encouraged to learn more. Is it a crime if he is not interested in science at all? Our society pushes an all around core curriculum and most students that are not interested in a subject fail it. So the school give's them a failing grade. Where as if they would make the core smaller as in the old, reading, riting ,rithmatic (the three r's) and let them pursue their academic interest, more children would excel in life.

reply to post by lynn112


It sounds like you have done a responsible job as a home teacher. My sincere kudos to you. One can only hope that every home schooler is as aware of the need for their child's social development.

reply to post by randyvs


Great post. I don't know why evolutionists think you can't know anything about science unless you accept their theory. Evolution has more holes than links and makes far less sense than creation. Creation is never taught as an alternative to evolution. I work in a middle school and all the teachers are evolutionists. Religion isn't allowed in the classroom. Home schooled children are usually ahead because they don't have to wait for all the unattentive kids to be called down and told again what they missed. The curriculum is usually ahead of public schools too.

reply to post by Conclusion

I have just went through my post's to try and find what you are talking about and can't seem to find it. Please post a link so I can point out the error in your judgment. I hope it is more than 2 or 3 since you used the term often.

Sorry about that, you used it just once. It just seems such an absurd phrase to me.

I misspelled many things, because I am not a native english speaker, and I type quickly. But I hope my posts are comprehensible enough...

The reason why I am so passionate about this subject is that I think there are MANY parents who would not allow their children to learn about evolution, if they could. And if we go down this road, then it could not be just evolution, but anything a parent disagrees with.

This I consider to be very dangerous for the childrens education. I would never agree with that.

I can understand that some people want openmindedness about the bible and its look on how we came to be but we can't teach our kids things that are proven wrong.

You can't tell them that earth has been made 6000years and the next second tell them the oldest civilizations is 10.000 years +.

I think its not responsible to do this.

To 911stinks: Great thread! It brings together many different issues: society v. individual rights, science v. religion, parents rights v. children's rights, etc. And on the whole, the participants have been unusually polite. Well done!

Originally posted by Conclusion
reply to post by Maslo

 

Yes if a child shows interest in any subject he should be encouraged to learn more. Is it a crime if he is not interested in science at all? Our society pushes an all around core curriculum and most students that are not interested in a subject fail it. So the school give's them a failing grade. Where as if they would make the core smaller as in the old, reading, riting ,rithmatic (the three r's) and let them pursue their academic interest, more children would excel in life.

This is a matter of actual curriculums, not very relevant to this debate. If a child attends some school where biology is not teached, then, of course, he will not learn about evolution.

But I think that evolution is such a basic concept that every child should learn about it at least once, in their elementary education. It is a cornerstone of current biology, and whether you consider it true or false, you have to know at least something about it.

reply to post by thestink


YOu can buy a Bible most anywhere, even the Dollar Store for a dollar. I would go for a King James. Thee and Thou both mean "you" a matter if its in the subject or the predicate. The explain further is "off topic."
So if the Bible says that the Earth will get old like clothes, how can you miss the fact that its following the second law of thermodynamics?
Sorry, mis read the post. Look up biblegateway.com on line and put in the reference for quick review.

[edit on 3/7/2010 by zachi]