'teach evolution instead of creationism'
[ support:54% : certainty:51 ] · [31 replies] ·
[0 comment]
-
oppose 0% · not intead ofmoderated to 0%; argued down by 0%
by anonymous on 2005-05-17 01:12:22We definitely should teach evolution. But it should not be taught so matter-of-factly as to preclude alternate ways of modeling the universe. Scientists should be sensitive to different belief systems and also remain openminded. Just as the Bohr model of the atom was later modified based on new information, we should also allow that biological models can admit of future discovery. When evolution is taught, it should be noted that it is excellent predictor of biological processes, provides generally accepted explanations for the development of earth life, but that it is a model or theory nonetheless and that it doesn't preclude one from having specific religious views. -
oppose 0% · Re: not intead ofmoderated to 0%; argued down by 0%
by anonymous on 2005-12-21 16:03:51One shouldn't be open-minded to foolish claims which with years of time, have not come up with any viable evidence. Evidence should be taught as it is, a theory. However. A scientific theory doesn't mean "A guess" or "What we personally think" For something to become theory in science, it needs heavy evidence to back it up. While we don't know all the ins and outs of HOW we evolved. We KNOW we evolved and we know Genesis is wrong. 7 "God days" doesn't work either because the word used was yom, which means short amount of time. Furthermore, as God rested on the seventh, so is the sabbath. Why would their be such a rule on humanity if the genesis story was not meant to be taken literal, with God resting on the seventh. Evolution and religion should not mix. Its like telling a mentally healthy person its good for them to take medication to cure schitzophrenia. If you aren't stupid, why lower yourself? -
oppose 0% · Re: not intead ofmoderated to 0%; argued down by 0%
by anonymous on 2006-02-21 05:56:04The Archdiocese of Baltimore affirms: "Be sure of it, your Seventh-day Adventist friends are telling you the truth, when they say that it was the Catholic church which changed the day of worship from the Jewish Sabbath to the Christian Sunday. ... If Protestantism would follow the Bible, they would worship God on the Sabbath Day. In keeping Sunday they are following a law of the Catholic church. During the first three centuries practice and tradition had consecrated the Sunday to the worship of God." Letter to Mrs. Ashby, February 10, 1920. Father Walter Drum says: "They [the Protestants] deem it their duty to keep the Sunday holy. Why? Because the Catholic Church tells them to do so. They have no other reason. ... The observance of Sunday thus comes to be an ecclesiastical law entirely distinct from the divine law of Sabbath observance. ... The author of the Sunday law ... is the Catholic Church." Ecclesiastical Review,February, 1914.
summary
title: 'Re: not intead of'
text: 'The Archdiocese of Baltimore affirms: "Be sure of it, your Seventh-day Adventist friends are telling you the truth, when they say that it was the Catholic church which changed the day of worship from the Jewish Sabbath to the Christian Sunday. ... If Protestantism would follow the Bible, they would worship God on the Sabbath Day. In keeping Sunday they are following a law of the Catholic church. During the first three centuries practice and tradition had consecrated the Sunday to the worship of God." Letter to Mrs. Ashby, February 10, 1920. Father Walter Drum says: "They [the Protestants] deem it their duty to keep the Sunday holy. Why? Because the Catholic Church tells them to do so. They have no other reason. ... The observance of Sunday thus comes to be an ecclesiastical law entirely distinct from the divine law of Sabbath observance. ... The author of the Sunday law ... is the Catholic Church." Ecclesiastical Review,February, 1914.'
tags: catholic,law
date: 2006-02-21 05:56:04
submitter: anonymous
effective: 0
support: 0
oppose: 0
stancePos: 0
stanceNeg: 0
stanceEffective:
repliesSupport: 0
repliesOppose: 0
repliesTotal: 0
comments: 0
Powered by Debatepoint.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License.