Why Do Christians Want Creationism Taught In Public Schools?

[placebo2]

I'm still anxiously waiting for someone to explain any of the benefits to the country for teaching creationism in public schools; reciting "under God" in the Pledge; placing "In God We Trust" on currency; and the numerous other such intrusions into state affairs.

Let's reverse the thought. What harm would come to the country if "under God" was removed from the Pledge? If "In God We Trust" was removed from currency? If "God" was removed from public oaths, and so on? Would the country plunge into chaos?

 

[amonk]

Why do Christians want creationism taught in public schools?

1. 50%+ of Americans are christians .
2. A reformed person is running presidency .

Now given that more than 50% of Americans are christians firstly outnumbers the evolutionists population , Either they are ;

1 .The subject of biology / evolution has not been taken into mind because of ;
a. People are to narrow minded to glimpse at the possibility of evolution.
b. People are not intelligent enough to understand what evolution is .

2 . The country have found Jesus in there life because of ;
a. They have all sinned and have become 'reformed' into christianity .
b. The have all been reared in families with strong religous beliefs and are brought into blind faith .

Now , if a reformed person is running the presidents chair how will that person reflect that country ?

He believes what he has done was wrong & dumb so he reconciles with faith following a doctrine of popular belief and believes he has been 'saved' & resoluted by Jesus . So he comes about a vision of peace which is illuded by a " What would Jesus do ? " attitude therefore runs a war in order to maintain the countries security in the name of Jesus .

How does someone like this wins voters ?

By educating the public with creationist drivel .

 

[amonk]

Placebo ,

God is an ambiguous word for many things .
The word can be used in many ways to suit different purposes in order to place an absolute importance on the value behind the ambiguous defintion of how one defines it .

Basically the word it is used to define the complete absolute truth which is then guided by a collective system of ones personal values .

 

[Cabes]

Placebo ,

God is an ambiguous word for many things .
The word can be used in many ways to suit different purposes in order to place an absolute importance on the value behind the ambiguous defintion of how one defines it .

Basically the word it is used to define the complete absolute truth which is then guided by a collective system of ones personal values .

This is correct.

Going back to main question, and taking into consideration that "christianity" is not some sort of corporate hierarchy (because thats what most "religions" have become) one would think that being created by a higher power would give one a sense of purpose which evolution fails to do. It comes down to ye olde evolution/creation debate, which really, is not that important and could go on forever.

If "God" was removed from public oaths, and so on? Would the country plunge into chaos?

Take a look at Marxism and where it got Russia.

 

[Dukey]

Why do Christians want creationism taught in public schools? Or "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance? Or, "In God We Trust" on currency? What purpose do the above serve? How do the above benefit the country?

its always been done that way....this nation was founded on christian principles

 

[Aduro Amnis]

Take a look at Marxism and where it got Russia.

The fastest industrialized economy?

 

[Randall McNally]

Take a look at Marxism and where it got Russia.

Not even. You have a very, very long way to go before even thinking about equating the potential absence of overt religious language in offical oaths with the violent suppression of public faith in the Soviet Union.

A little perspective, please.

 

[StainedClassKing]

Take a look at Marxism and where it got Russia.

That is an excellent point. Marxism, a religion much like Christianity with one of the only difference being that Yahweh was replaced by the state, violently opposed any religion that contradicted it, just like what Christianity has always attempted to do in America. The result was that Marxism eventually destroyed Russia, just like Christianity just might do to America.

You really shed some light on this. I'm glad you said that. Now if only more people would see it that way.

 

[Arikay]

I think it comes down to a couple things,
1) People just don't like to change. Whether this means their kids being taught something they think isn't true, or removing God from the pledge. Right or wrong, change is bad.

2) The unknown is scary and a threat to faith. It often seems like to some people anything that isn't about God is a threat to their faith, especially when they don't understand it.

3) Many people want everyone else to think like they do and when they have the power to try and force it onto others, they do so. This is especially enhanced when they are a majority or when they want to feel like they belong to an elite group.

4) Some people are followers, having no reason to want these things besides x told them so.


Of course, plenty of other people that aren't christians have these problems too (Stupid france and their stupid idea of secularism, giving people in america just one more hurdle to jump over, ok baby rant over. )

 

[Cabes]

just like what Christianity has always attempted to do in America. The result was that Marxism eventually destroyed Russia, just like Christianity just might do to America

HAha! That's True actually!! Beliefs should never be Intergrated with the state. It's a pity that "christianity" has become a political/corporate hierarchy.

Not even. You have a very, very long way to go before even thinking about equating the potential absence of overt religious language in offical oaths with the violent suppression of public faith in the Soviet Union.

ha ha! yeah sorry about that, I guess I wasn't thinking about the equation, I was just thinking about old karly boy himself and his sorry tale

 

[Gracchus]

Take a look at Marxism and where it got Russia.

Comment: "Of one thing I am sure. I am not a Marxist." -- Karl Marx

 

[Cabes]

Comment: "Of one thing I am sure. I am not a Marxist." -- Karl Marx

well there you have it. I heard also that Darwin refuted evolution?

 

[Aduro Amnis]

Marx was refering to a group who called themsleves "marxist" but were petty bourgeoisie socialist.

And no, Darwin never refuted. He was a firm supporter of his discovery through his as a member of the clergy and while he was agnostic (after his daughter died, how sad ;_; )

 

[CrownCaster]

Why do Christians want creationism taught in public schools? Or "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance? Or, "In God We Trust" on currency? What purpose do the above serve? How do the above benefit the country?

I do not want the school to teach Creationism. That is my job. I also do not want evolution taught to them either.

As far as "under God" and "in God we trust", Because that is the foundation of this country and the only thing that ever made it a great nation. God is either at the helm of this nation or it will fold. We see this happening more and more as God is further removed. I do not care much for the pledge in the first place but will not allow my child to recite it if "under God" is removed. I am glad I live in this country as there is what I like here but I have no allegiance to america as a nation. My citizenship is in Heaven.

 

[Gracchus]

I do not want the school to teach Creationism. That is my job. I also do not want evolution taught to them either.

And since the law dictates teaching science in public schools, and evolution is science, you would be well advised to home school or send your children to a religious instituion of your choice.

As far as "under God" and "in God we trust", Because that is the foundation of this country and the only thing that ever made it a great nation. God is either at the helm of this nation or it will fold. We see this happening more and more as God is further removed.

Can you give examples of nations that have had "God at the helm"? I am not trying to start a fight, I am just curious. (Though I feel I would be remiss if I didn't point out that this country was founded on slavery, genocide, and the ruthless explotation of the environment.) Are any of those God-run nations still around?

I do not care much for the pledge in the first place but will not allow my child to recite it if "under God" is removed. I am glad I live in this country as there is what I like here but I have no allegiance to america as a nation. My citizenship is in Heaven.

I don't see much point in the pledge. I would in conscience and in principle, withhold an unconditional pledge of allegiance, nor would I accept that we are in fact, and in every case, "under God".

 

[Arikay]

Cabes:
Nope, just a myth. It comes from multiple sources, such as poor readings of his book and the claim that he recanted on his death bed.
Some people misread his book and think that when Darwin says we have no evidence for x claim, that it holds true today. Matter of fact he made predictions of what we would find in the future if evolution was true, and they were often right. Making predictions to test is a solid foundation of science.
Even if he did recant it doesn't invalidate the evidence of the last 150 years. Also known as the "lady hope" story it was a false claim made by people who didn't like his ideas of evolution at the time.
When darwin developed evolution he was a solid christian and it can be seen in his writings.


Crown:
Perhaps you can give us a history of these "foundation" phrases. Such as, when was the first time "under god" was said in the pledge, or on our money?
(The answer of course is that these are 20th century additions created during the red scare, and I find it odd that christians would want to hold onto terms that hold a history of witchhunts and persecutions or anyone who didn't think the way a "true american" did.)

well there you have it. I heard also that Darwin refuted evolution?

 

[CrownCaster]

And since the law dictates teaching science in public schools, and evolution is science, you would be well advised to home school or send your children to a religious instituion of your choice.

Evolution is science? Okay, I see there is no need to further this one.

 

[Subordinationist]

Why do Christians want creationism taught in public schools? Or "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance? Or, "In God We Trust" on currency? What purpose do the above serve? How do the above benefit the country?

The only solution to this is equal representation in government. If there is no religious representation in government, the atheists are preferred, and if there is "IN GOD WE TRUST", then the Christians are preferred. Same goes for government schools, macro-evolution is a doctrine of several religious/non-religious peoples, and creationism is a doctrine of several religious peoples. To exclude one or the other in a PUBLIC setting would be unfair and pose an educational dictatorship upon all children. If an atheist wants to start a school, then nothing but evolution can be taught. If a Chirstian wants to start a school, then nothing but creationism can be taught. Private schools are intristically allowed to be exclusive, public school (public anything) is not.

Why teach creationism along side macro-evolution in public school? Because many tax-paying people believe it is true. Because it would be fair and equal.



.

 

[placebo2]

... As far as "under God" and "in God we trust", Because that is the foundation of this country and the only thing that ever made it a great nation. God is either at the helm of this nation or it will fold. We see this happening more and more as God is further removed. ...

Could you give examples of how God has been further removed, and the harm that it has caused? Also, how much more "God" do you want put into government? Should the Ten Commandments all be codified into law? If so, should we also use Biblical punishments for breaking the commandments? Death is the punishment for breaking most of them. I would just like to know how far you want this God in government principle to go.

 

[Arikay]

1) How is "no comment" prefering the atheists? Quite frankly the secular or agnostic view should be taken, in which the government just has no opinion about religion. That seems the most equal representation for all.

2) Macro evolution is NOT a religious doctrine (who ever told you that is wrong), scientifically macro evolution is basically the creation of a new species (it is more complicated than that). This has been observed, it's part of science.
Just because creationist organzations want to lie, shift the goal posts, and pretend it doesn't exist, isn't my problem, and it shouldn't be our childrens problems either.

3) Science does not work on popular opinion (if it did, you would be amazed at the false information we we be teaching our children). Science is based on evidence. When creationism can put together a theory that has evidence and that can stand up to scrutiny, or can provide evidence against evolution that can stand up to scrutiny, then it should be taught in science. Until then, it belongs in philosophy or psuedo science and not in our science class rooms.

The only solution to this is equal representation in government. If there is no religious representation in government, the atheists are preferred, and if there is "IN GOD WE TRUST", then the Christians are preferred. Same goes for government schools, macro-evolution is a doctrine of several religious/non-religious peoples, and creationism is a doctrine of several religious peoples. To exclude one or the other in a PUBLIC setting would be unfair and pose an educational dictatorship upon all children. If an atheist wants to start a school, then nothing but evolution can be taught. If a Chirstian wants to start a school, then nothing but creationism can be taught. Private schools are intristically allowed to be exclusive, public school (public anything) is not.

Why teach creationism along side macro-evolution in public school? Because many tax-paying people believe it is true. Because it would be fair and equal.



.