Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[unomomento]

Do you mena a bullet like the one God created on the 5th day?

No, the kind that evolved from steel!

On the news last night I saw a story on the Creationist Museum in Kansas (I think) and was disappointed to find the guy that created it was an Aussie who used to study evolution, but found it to have 'too many inconsistencies'. Ha! So Creationism solves it all for ya then hey? Idiot. I thought this sort of stupidity was limited to America, but alas no such luck.

Then they asked an American woman visiting the museum what she thought about evolution and she replied: 'I was brought up a good christian girl, with god and the bible and all that. I cant believe all that evolution nonsense, it's just ridiculous'. Yeah, dumb bitch. Wake up and take a look around you freaking halfwit.

This blind faith sort-of-thing that seems so prevalent in America just fires me up. Maybe Im satan. 
Btw, the museum Im talking about cost 33 million to build. I wonder who paid for that?

[Keridwen]

Of course at the tender age of 6 you have taken in so much of life you can actually determine what is bullshit and what is not.   

  Of course.

Isn't that the point? I didn't say it was "bullshit - everyone who believes this is completely wrong" - I said that I didn't believe any of it. No matter how old you are... don't you think we can decide for ourselves what is true... for ourselves? This patronisation of the young is what is brainwashing these kids!! Adults think, well, they can't discover and figure it out for themselves, so we better tell them what WE think is true.

I'm not sure about 6, but I came to the same decision when I was about 9.

Little minds see a lot more than we give them credit for. I think that they are particularly good at spotting hypocrisy, which is the staple diet of some religions.

Exactly.

[Fritz]

I'm not sure about 6, but I came to the same decision when I was about 9.

Little minds see a lot more than we give them credit for. I think that they are particularly good at spotting hypocrisy, which is the staple diet of some religions.

Oh 9 - well there is a better age. You were *much* older than 6.

Fuck it, let's go to to the people and get a voice behind dropping the legal age of voting to 10.

Actually that is not a bad idea considering I pay a few 12 year olds $3 an hour to do work that I would normally have to fork out $22 an hour for some slack arse, emo, oh whoa is me pimply arts fucking student who believes with their camcorder are going to save the world. At least I won't get anymore flack over child labour. 

[Keridwen]

Fuck it, let's go to to the people and get a voice behind dropping the legal age of voting to 10.

So you honestly believe that younger children shouldn't, or don't, have the capacity to assess "faith"?

[Fritz]

So you honestly believe that younger children shouldn't, or don't, have the capacity to assess "faith"?

Assess is one thing. And no I don't think any child can truly assess. Being able to make an educated judgement is another thing. Although if you ask anyone under the age of 20, they are always right and knows how the world works in all of it's entirety.

[DiddlySquat]

Fritz, do you have kids?

(I'm guessing not)

[Keridwen]

Assess is one thing. And no I don't think any child can truly assess. Being able to make an educated judgement is another thing. Although if you ask anyone under the age of 20, they are always right and knows how the world works in all of it's entirety.

A child can't assess? A child can't look at something, weigh up the benefits etc? Children are the best bloody manipulators there are! Look how successful ad campaigns addressing children are? Children can assess much more than we think they can. How do we explain the kids, to use an example inside this argument, who do decide at an early age, like we have claimed, that this religion business isn't for them?

And I think your 'anyone under the age of 20' generalisation is a pretty big one. There are many, many arrogant people. Regardless of age. Young people truly believe that they "know everything" - making them arrogant. Older people cling to the "experience" argument rather than the "knowledge" argument - thus making them arrogant. The entire human race is arrogant.

[The Rogue Doll]

Sorry to interupt your argument, just give me a second:

The one thing that always bothers me about the debates (about creationism vs. Darwinians) is that we don't know for sure and there is no way we can know for sure. I do think that people who pick a side and dismiss other peoples opinions easily are fairly ignorant. We can never know for sure, at least not until we die I guess.

I know I've gotten fairly off topic, as the topic was about whether children should be taught these things. But, as I said earlier, they should probably be taught both, so they can make their own decisions later on in life. The whole brainwash thing is unavoidable. We all 'brainwash' our children, telling them one thing is above another (Christianity vs Darwinians, God vs Satan, Good vs Bad, etc).

 Oh, I sound like that chick that went nuts and killed her mother. I don't know. Maybe I'm just need to sleep.

Go back to whatever you were talking about now.

[Fritz]

A child can't assess? A child can't look at something, weigh up the benefits etc? Children are the best bloody manipulators there are! Look how successful ad campaigns addressing children are? Children can assess much more than we think they can. How do we explain the kids, to use an example inside this argument, who do decide at an early age, like we have claimed, that this religion business isn't for them?

If you look at my quote, and I will repeat it for the sake of you having to look above this one and try to find it - "....cild cannot truly assess". To truly assess and make judgement, you are required to be informed. If children were truly informed then what is the need for a child to go to school past the age of 10?

And I think your 'anyone under the age of 20' generalisation is a pretty big one. There are many, many arrogant people. Regardless of age. Young people truly believe that they "know everything" - making them arrogant. Older people cling to the "experience" argument rather than the "knowledge" argument - thus making them arrogant. The entire human race is arrogant.

Yes, it is a mighty broom I carry, but it comes from many years of sweeping. We call it experience, which you have so adaptly now branded older people with. I have not stated that only people under the age of 20 are arrogant, as I run into arogant people every day - it's a human trait.

 And to the contrary, older people do not cling to the experience argument, I am in my mid 30's and continue to study. However, I will say that street cred through experience is a much better lesson than a degree. A degree gives you the theory, how it is practiced is another thing in it's entirety. Depending on your experience, you also learn to pick the lecturers who have had "experience" compared to some cardigan wearing virgins who have not stepped outside their lecture halls but still think they know the world they preach about.

I am not asking you to understand it as it would be unfair to ask someone who is young to understand it. In 15 years you will sit back and say - "oh now I know what he was crapping on about."  

[Fritz]

Fritz, do you have kids?

(I'm guessing not)

Diddly, A straight beats a flush.

No I don't but I was one once. 

[Fritz]

No, the kind that evolved from steel!

 

Hang on!

You don't believe in God, but you believe in Superman? 

[Keridwen]

If you look at my quote, and I will repeat it for the sake of you having to look above this one and try to find it - "....cild cannot truly assess". To truly assess and make judgement, you are required to be informed. If children were truly informed then what is the need for a child to go to school past the age of 10?

Ok - so the basis for this argument is that it's possible to be informed? Because that is the whole idea of this debate. No one is "informed"! No one knows for sure, as TRD articulated. Why are children blasted for not being informed it is impossible to be "informed" in relation to this debate? Yes, they can assess this argument. And they have done. And, hopefully, they will continue to do so.

I am not asking you to understand it as it would be unfair to ask someone who is young to understand it. In 15 years you will sit back and say - "oh now I know what he was crapping on about."  

Ho hum. When the patronising comments come marching in! This is learning, I guess, if we're still content to hang onto the condescension.

[Fritz]

Sorry to interupt your argument, just give me a second:

No argument being interrupted here. It is more of a "lesson", hey keird & diddles  

The one thing that always bothers me about the debates (about creationism vs. Darwinians) is that we don't know for sure and there is no way we can know for sure. I do think that people who pick a side and dismiss other peoples opinions easily are fairly ignorant. We can never know for sure, at least not until we die I guess.

I have a faith, however I am also not stupid enough to ignore scientific fact.

The problem usually is with these types of arguments is that sides are drawn at the poles of each spectrum. Quite dangerous actually and that is where the ignorance sinks in.

I know I've gotten fairly off topic, as the topic was about whether children should be taught these things. But, as I said earlier, they should probably be taught both, so they can make their own decisions later on in life. The whole brainwash thing is unavoidable. We all 'brainwash' our children, telling them one thing is above another (Christianity vs Darwinians, God vs Satan, Good vs Bad, etc).

 

Correct in parts - Our children should be taught as much as possible to help them be as informed as possible. For instance, if I was a facist from old Germany and believed the holocaust never happened and I forbid my child to learn anything about it because I believed it was nonsense, then what type of a parent does this make me. I am guessing the same type of parent who at the mature age of 6 or 9 decided that religion was full of crap so their child does not need to know about it either. These are the type of people who do not let their children take their own path as they grow older and the ones who feel let down when the child goes another way with their life.

[Fritz]

Ok - so the basis for this argument is that it's possible to be informed? Because that is the whole idea of this debate. No one is "informed"! No one knows for sure, as TRD articulated. Why are children blasted for not being informed it is impossible to be "informed" in relation to this debate? Yes, they can assess this argument. And they have done. And, hopefully, they will continue to do so.

Look into the future.

You are sitting there with your 9 year old son. You play the part of K (and I will presume you are female) and your son will play the part of K Jnr.

K - What did you learn at school today son?

K Jnr - Well, I learned about the Christian faith.

K - Did you learn much?

K Jnr - Well Johnny kept picking his nose and flicking it at me and then bobby farted and then I got in trouble for talking to Mikey while the teacher was talking - I got yelled at as apparently it's rude to talk when other people are talking.

K - But what did you learn?

K Jnr - Well, heaps and lots and stuff. And now I am really informed because I assess all the possible notions and philosphy around faith whilst undertaking my undergraduate on Darwinism - all in that 2 hours too mum.

K - That good son, now time to go to bed.

K Jnr - But mum, I have assessed the fact that the esitmated sleep I can get if I go to bed in another two hours after watching a few hours of the simpsons will but me in a much better learning light tomorrow.

K - Oh son, you are so smart, I do not need to guide you as a parent and teach you the ways, to hell with discipline, I will be glad when you grow up to be a ignorant ponce.

Nup - Doesn't sound right to me either 

Patronisation - used when all sense has been spoken but you are still banging your head against the wall.

[Keridwen]

Ok - I'm still learning here, allow me to ask questions to clarify.

The basis of that (entertaining) spiel seemed to be that you need to have 5 doctorates and a bishops collar before you are deemed informed enough to decide whether you err on the side of faith or fact.

Is that how it works? I think not. Everyone is able to decide, based on the little information they know. My limited world experience tells me I should ignore faith, which I do. I cannot, for the life of me, bring myself to have faith. So I choose to believe in science, fact. If an experience comes along at some later date to change my mind, I'm ready. I doubt it, but this is a hypothetical after all.