X2

Yes, there is overlap and yes there is conflict.

What examples are you thinking of in your questions?

I was thinking about something like Catholic or Lutheran social services. Both receive state and federal funding to promote social welfare (adoption, immigration) goals while those same "virtues" are promoted by their religious convictions. I have no doubt that similar things can be found in a school setting.

Make no mistake. The power of the purse has been the biggest hammer by which our American government has implemented initiatives.
How the government does what it does, can't be argued. That's perfectly clear.
They dangle $$$$ and the other party dances to the tune.
The question for our society is....
what tune are they playing?

The tentacles of the state run deeper than we could imagine because the money amount is off the charts high.

There is no separation of church and state. Only a Constitutional amendment that says the government can't choose one religion as the "official" one and can't prevent you from practicing the one you want to practice.

I think public dollars allocated for education should be portable and parents should be able to choose the school of their choice including religious and private schools. The government needs some competition. The private sector always does a better job at a lower cost than government does.

That money shouldn't go for the operation of churches so it gets to be a little fuzzy with religious schools. Maybe, some accounting demarcation needs to be in place to prevent school money from going into the operational expenses of churches, only to the operational expenses of the private schools - even if they are religious schools.

Some religious schools teach Creationism as science. That should be unacceptable for education programs deserving of public funding.

Jim

If they win it would include that group as well would it not?

We homeschool and i don't want their money or the strings that would come with it.

Why? Because YOU don't believe it?

If we don't like what our public schools are teaching, show up to school board meetings and elections. If you really have a problem with something, run for the school board and debate your points in public.


I would prefer if there is no religion in school other than some type of religious studies type class in HS that would cover many different religions in an objective manner. Leave teaching of faith to the kids' families.

Some public schools teach men can have babies as science. That should be unacceptable for education programs deserving of public funding.

Public funding for public schools is more vote. If you have an issue with your local public school you can change it. You can run for school board, volunteer, or pull your kids and send them somewhere else on your dime. I think getting involved is more important than pulling them out.

I don’t want tax money going with kids to schools that have no curriculum oversight. Creationism isn’t taught in public school science classes because it has no scientific evidence. It’s a purely religious belief. Just like men having babies isn’t taught either as it’s silly. You can always find a jerk in every bunch. Teachers are no different for sure but most I know are pretty stand up folks. Don’t let a few ruin it for the bunch. Education starts with parents. Your kids won’t fall for craziness if you raise them right. Focusing on your local school is important for the whole community. Get involved.

Happy winter all!

Hypothetical situation. We all live in the same town and we all pay taxes. I'd we are all paying taxes, why should some qualify for the money and some don't just based on where we send our kids to school?

No, but because there's a big, envious, competitive world out there. We have to educate our young people in science, not pseudo-science or religion, in order for our graduates to compete.

Creationism belongs in religious instruction, not science class.

Jim

James, private schools do teach science too.

My daughter went to a religious Christian school. I know what they teach.

They told her--in biology class, no less--that evolution was false.

If they're teaching creationism, what about the Japanese Shinto belief that a god and goddess created the earth?

Jim

I went to a private school. A catholic one and I'm not even catholic. My biology and advanced biology teacher was a nun. We were taught about evolution in that class. I guess all religious schools are not the same.

If you don't think kids in some public school systems are being taught that "men" can have babies, you are sadly sheltered.

Why don't you enlighten us with proof?

Jim

First of all, various philosophers like Oppenheimer and Whitehead have written authoritatively on the subject that Judea-Christianity provided the worldview that gave birth to modern science. Ancient cultures of Egypt, Greek, Chinese, Persia and others had advanced cultures but their polytheism and lack of interest in science was never sustained over centuries as it has been for thousands of years with Christianity >>>> and thus knowledge of a Creator spawned the framework for modern science.

Creationism, the belief in Creation by an Intelligent Being has been embraced by religious AND non-religious people alike, as researchers learn more. The vastness of 15 B lightyears at one end down to the now discovered "quark," has led respected secular researchers to submit this 7 point "Problems with Theories of Natural Selection," at recent science gatherings.
1. An infinite statistical probability that it occurred.
2. Intellegibility of the Universe: the universe seems designed for comprehension
3. 2d Law of Thermodynamics: In a closed system, everything returns to the minimal level of complexity and activity.
4. Complete lack of Transitional Evidence - specie to specie
5. Irreducible Biological Complexities: there appear to be thousands of complex biological systems now discovered, that could not have evolved due to necessity for mutually interlocking system reliance. One can't evolve without the other
6. DNA Information Coding: Stephen Meyer's "Signature in the Cell" has assessed the impossibility of DNA coding mutation evolving to current levels now discovered.
7. Human Uniqueness: reason and thought are exclusive to one species only, including capacities for love, music and other activities not of an evolutionary basis

Darwinism has lost its shine and Darwin's "Black Box" has been announced but not answered by the major evolutionists like Richard Dawkins, etc..... "What do we do when the empirical evidence AND materialistic philosophy are going in different directions?" This is a question to Dawkins at a national science symposia (most all secularist) and he did not comment.

Darwinism, like the ever growing environmental "science" is more thesis and philosophy than anything.
As a scientist myself, I abhor what science has become..... shut up and sit down meetings.

Blessings,
Mark

Mark, are you in favor of teaching creationism in schools?

If so, which creation myth should be taught? The Shinto one?

Your argument against evolution--which I don't accept, btw--does not lead to the conclusion that the Christian creation story is the true one. If evolution is a completely inaccurate theory--which it's not--the Christian belief is no more or less true because of it.

Jim