This Week in God

[cbayer]

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/09/28/20732562-this-week-in-god


Ken Lund/flickr

By Steve Benen - Sat Sep 28, 2013 10:23 AM EDT

First up from the God Machine this week is a look at a curious fight in Kansas, where religio-political conservatives believe science lessons violate the separation of church and state.

A Kansas-based group that “promotes the religious rights of parents, children, and taxpayers” is challenging the state’s science standards because they include the teaching of evolution, which the group claims is a religion and therefore should be excluded from science class.

As the AP reports, Citizens for Objective Public Education (COPE) claims that public schools “promote a ‘non-theistic religious worldview’ by allowing only ‘materialistic’ or ‘atheistic’ explanations to scientific questions.” The group argues that by teaching evolution “the state would be ‘indoctrinating’ impressionable students in violation of the First Amendment.”

COPE’s challenge [PDF] states that the teaching of evolution “amounts to an excessive government entanglement with religion” and violates the rights of Christian parents.

more at link

[pinto]

1. Nice try.

But that's quite a stretch. Science doesn't equal atheism.

[iemitsu]

2. Atheism is not a religion to an atheist,

only those, who can't image a world without god, understand atheism that way.
An absurd argument to put forward in an attempt to dismiss science, when it doesn't conform to the dogmatic time line of fundamentalist Christians.

[cbayer]

3. Agree that it is an absurd argument. I don't think they will get very far.

There is another thread from yesterday that has more information on this as well.

[pinto]

4. I think it's a lame attempt at turning church / state seperation issue on its head.

Along with conflating that with 1st Amendment standards. I'd be surprised if the case gets heard.

[iemitsu]

7. Just another example of right wing projection.

Their motto is, "always accuse the opposition of doing the vile things you plan to do, or have done, yourself", or "be the first to point your finger".
Basic psychology needs to become a standard requirement in all public high schools, so our citizens might have a better understanding of how Psy-War works.
We are being manipulated in ways that can easily be identified (and avoided) by those with some working knowledge of how our brains and emotions work.

[JEFF9K]

5. These people who don't believe in science ...

... should be forced to give up their computers, cars, smartphones, TVs, Viagra, automatic weapons, ...

[cbayer]

6. Lol, great idea.

As well as any access to doctors and hospitals.

[struggle4progress]

8. Science by definition involves natural answers to natural questions: that's why

people with different metaphysical views and different religious views can do science together and agree about the results

Science doesn't take a stand on "metaphysical" or "religious" or "supernatural" questions -- it simply ignores them as being irrelevant to the process of scientific investigation. To argue against science, on the grounds that it ignores such questions, is to argue against science generally

The whole problem here arises because people think a word like "true" refers on particular and definite category -- but it doesn't. It can be true that a person in guilty by law of a murder, and it can be true at the same time that the person had nothing whatsoever to do with the murder. A fact can be true in mathematics and at the same time be utterly without any experimental meaning that could render the fact "true" in the physical world. The "truth" of a scientific fact means something like: no credible combination of theory and experiment discredits the fact more than credible combinations of theory and experiment support it -- but statements about morality, that people consider so, simply cannot be proved "true" in this manner