Search Evolution on Yahoo! and you find this.
Look up theory in Webster's and you get this:
the·o·ry  Pronunciation: 'thE-&-rE, 'thi(-&)r-E Function: nounInflected Form(s): plural -ries Etymology: Late Latin theoria, from Greek theOria, from theOrein 1 : the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another 2 : abstract thought : SPECULATION 3 : the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art 4 a : a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action 5 : a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena 6 a : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b : an unproved assumption : CONJECTURE c : a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject <theory of equations> synonym see HYPOTHESIS |  |
Yes people, the Theory of Evolution is going to court in California. There is a school down in Fresno that has decided to have a class dedicated to refuting the Theory of Evolution by using science, biology and Biblical ideas to show students that the Theory of Evolution is wrong. The class is being disguised as a philosophy class instead of a true science. I personally think it's great and would have taken the class if I was in high school.
And what is it about evolution that drives us all nuts. If you believe the scientists, you need to understand that the Theory of Evolution is just that: A theory. Look at the word theory as it appears in the Webster's entry again. What if we called it the Speculation of Evolution or the Conjecture of Evolution? We'd all call Mr. Darwin a quack. But since it's a "Theory". Whoa! It's believable. It's something to have faith in. Something to sort of defend, perhaps even worship. You know, kinda like a religion?
Why is it that kids NEED to learn Evolution so bad in our schools, yet denied an alternate view? You have to have the proper belief system in order for a theory to be true. The SCOTUS has already ruled in Torasco vs Watkins, that atheism, or "secular humanism" is a religion. No matter what an atheist puts forward, they are still fronting a belief system regardless if there is no ultimate deity or after life, which is what many of the world's religions support. Atheism by definition fits a description of what Webster's defines as religion. (Look at 3 and 4)
So if evolution is a secular humanist's idea, then it technically is a religious argument. Isn't it? So if it is an idea why are we teaching it in our schools but not along side an alternative view. Our public schools are technically preaching "religion" to our kids by teaching evolution. It's kinda like sex education if you think about it. You teach the kids the facts, and the parts, and how they all go together. Then you have to make them believe in a system so they won't get a disease if they abstain or use protection, or that you'll not get pregnant and they don't. You are imposing a belief system on them by punishing them with consequences.
Makes you think, don't it?
And what is it about evolution that drives us all nuts. If you believe the scientists, you need to understand that the Theory of Evolution is just that: A theory. Look at the word theory as it appears in the Webster's entry again. What if we called it the Speculation of Evolution or the Conjecture of Evolution? We'd all call Mr. Darwin a quack. But since it's a "Theory". Whoa! It's believable. It's something to have faith in. Something to sort of defend, perhaps even worship. You know, kinda like a religion?
Why is it that kids NEED to learn Evolution so bad in our schools, yet denied an alternate view? You have to have the proper belief system in order for a theory to be true. The SCOTUS has already ruled in Torasco vs Watkins, that atheism, or "secular humanism" is a religion. No matter what an atheist puts forward, they are still fronting a belief system regardless if there is no ultimate deity or after life, which is what many of the world's religions support. Atheism by definition fits a description of what Webster's defines as religion. (Look at 3 and 4)
So if evolution is a secular humanist's idea, then it technically is a religious argument. Isn't it? So if it is an idea why are we teaching it in our schools but not along side an alternative view. Our public schools are technically preaching "religion" to our kids by teaching evolution. It's kinda like sex education if you think about it. You teach the kids the facts, and the parts, and how they all go together. Then you have to make them believe in a system so they won't get a disease if they abstain or use protection, or that you'll not get pregnant and they don't. You are imposing a belief system on them by punishing them with consequences.
Makes you think, don't it?
No comments:
Post a Comment