It's funny how people want teachers to do everything and not pay them for it, but when the teachers don't do it EXACTLY the way the parents want then they start complaining. If the parents woyuld step up to the plate, assume some responsibility and do some parenting, it would take care of most of the messes our society is in today.

Hey, here would be a good one: Let's see some of those drug dealers get sued for leading the youth astray, instead of the guy who is preaching the word of God. Why is that? No money in a lawsuit against a drug dealer. But there would be money in a lawsuit against a school district.

Hey Parents...are you communicating with your kids? If you aren't, someone else WILL.

I generally try to be the civil voice among those uncivil, however I will deviate from my morals somewhat here.

Few human inventions have had as much impact on the human race as much as religon. A few may include communication, agriculture, and commerce. To really understand this invention, one must look into the possible reasons behind its creation. The two most obvious that come to mind are A) To explain what cannot be explained by the science of the time, and B) To enforce a set of moral values on a large group of people that would be otherwise impossible to enforce. The latter is done by inventing a fictional parent figure (i.e. a god) that will sit above everyone and shake his/her proverbial finger at those who break said moral code. This becomes a powerful, indispensable tool in ruling people, and when it grows to a level of radical fanaticism, it also becomes a powerful tool of oppression and hate. The power religon holds in ruling people is the reason I believe that it did not die out in the Renissance along with many other Old World ideas (i.e. "The world is flat") This is most evident in today's society by Muslim extremists, however don't think for a minute Christianity doesn't have their share as well. Ever learn about the Crusades in school? How about the radical Christians who bomb abortion clinics? Now you are probably thinking that I have a very dim, unfair view of religion. This is true, but I do recognize that religion can give people hope and inspire them to turn their life around. Those a very positive attributes of religon and why I don't believe it is the greatest threat to the human race we have ever invented. However does something of this nature deserve to be not only taught, but supported in schools? I think not.

What????????????????

Haven't you heard of free will? If you believe in nothing, you stand for nothing.

My kids came home from school and told me it was against the law for a teacher to say "Merry Christmas" and that now our schools are no longer on Christmas Break, but are now on a Holiday Break. I don't think that saying Merry Christmas is pushing your beliefs off on to others.

When people immigrate to this country I feel that they need to know that our country has many things that say "In God we Trust" "One Nation under God" and other references to God. If they don't like it then please don't move here.

What a nation of hypocrites we have become!

It's wrong to wish someone a Merry Christmas or Happy Easter, but it's okay for a Happy Hanukkah or Happy Kwanzaa. We can sue a school to prevent a Nativity scene, but a menorah is acceptable. We sue to prevent the Pledge of allegiance, yet "In God We Trust" is plastered all over our money.

We, collectively as a nation need to take a step or two back and actually look at the big picture... The principles this country was founded on, then take a look in the direction we're forcing it... The toilet is starting to swirl and it won't be long before we go down the crapper...

Amen brother!

For some people, Faith in the lord is all they have, at the rate we're going, that'll be taken away as well.

Whatrockis,I find it hard to believe,that someone can become so disillusioned(sp). What happened in your life to cause your present belief system? I personally want to encourage you to put your philosophy to the test by reading scripture and asking your 'god' to reveal himself to you. If that is not paletable for you, I would also like to encourage you to consider a more secular book by Josh McDowell called 'More than a Carpenter'.

Oh dear child. I read a post of yours on another feed, and I must express my bewilderment that someone who has studied history at all, much less to the extent you have, can call themselves religious as pertaining to a christian god at all. While we are throwing out reading suggestions, I must challenge you to read Portrait of the Artist as a Young Manand Uylsses by James Joyce. That is if your are capable of comprehending Joyce. I must say that I do regret paying little attention to the discipline of theology, however, I do feel confident in my studies of anthrophology, philosophy, psycology, and history (this is in addition to my first two loves, art histroy and literiture) to put any theory to any test. Oh, you ask what traumatic event caused this "disillusioned" belief? The answer to that is quite simple. I read a book or two, my firend.

True to form that one would consider another unintellectual and assume they are not well read (or would even desire to be) if they make any claims to religion, especially the God of the Bible.

I would contend that it takes a greater leap of faith to believe that the complexities of our biological systems happened by a random chance rather than by an intelligent design.

One point… there is absolutely no evidence that intelligence can be derived from an unintelligent source. Take Paley’s example of arriving on a deserted island and on the beach we see an artifact (watch). Comparing all the other rocks, we immediately realize there was intelligence involved in the making of the artifact. There is no reason to believe otherwise.

Another point… Nobody lives as if they are merely a machine, because a machine is all one really is if we were not intentionally designed. As much as one would try, they cannot live consistently from this presupposition. They must make a leap to apply personality to mankind.

Christianity is a system that does answer mankind’s most basic questions. There was a beginning and there will be an end. There is an answer to why we have a personality. The Christian God created everything freely in a non-determinant fashion, then created man separately, in his image, so personality is intrinsic to our makeup. A Christian therefore has a reasonable explanation to the source and meaning of human personality.

There is also no reason then, not to believe God would communicate with us propositionally, but I will save that thought for another time.

Of course if you use the bible as your reference for religion, then you could just as easily use Harry Potter. Both are novels and do not give an actual, irrefutable, recorded series of events. They both represent an author’s point of view of the events. Now in science you have actual, real events that are recorded in history and substantiated by facts. The survival of the fittest demonstrates that living organisms adapt and modify their actions and physical being to maintain their existence. If you get caught up believing in a fictional character such as god, then you might as well ride a broom and live in England! Bless me Harry Potter for I am about to sin! Oops, I mean live to the best of my ability!

Many people fail to understand the concept of evolution, as you who like to point out 'survival of the fittest'.

Many people seem to think that all these species came from one. This has yet to be proved by science. There is evidence that points to it, one being the similarity of DNA in many creatures. However, it has not been proven.

As far as Darwin goes, his theories deal with many versions of the same type of bird. Finches for example. Most people believe that fish became salamanders and salamanders dogs and dogs monkeys and monkeys humans. This simply isn't the case in my belief.

Evolution is caused by a MUTATION in genes, which works to the benefit of the animal. The finches had different beaks. These MUTATIONS seemed to help the finch exploit a new niche. And so they were able to outcompete other finches for those food sources. Similarly, many snakes have a vestigial pelvis. A mutation of a lizard born without legs. Thus the snake had an advantage in hunting burrows etc. and was thus able to outcompete other lizards for this niche. Survival of the fittest. Bad mutations or other non mutations which were outcompeted, died away.

Now, how each type of animal was started, is another conversation. But after we get to each type of animal, this is how evolution worked.

My humble scientific views of evolution, boiled down to simple form. For all of us dumb Christians to understand.

by the way...adapting physical being...
How does a finch grow a new beak?
An animal cannot change its physical makeup. Humans have plastic surgery, but those changes will not be passed on no matter how many generations of chin tucks take place.

speaking of good writing.
I am going to defend Panther here, at the risk of offending, based on an attack by the offendee.

If you are capable of understanding Joyce.
If a writer cannot write so that people know what he is saying, he must not be a great writer. He must not be able to convey coherent thought.

So that is not a very good attack is it. I agree, Joyce is good, but your attack is falacious.

"What is the age of the soul of man? As she hath the virtue of the chameleon to change her hue at every new approach, to be gay with the merry and mournful with the downcast, so too is her age changable as her mood. No longer is Leopold, as he sits there, ruminating, chewing the cud of reminiscence, that staid agent of publicity and holder of a modest substance in the funds. He is young Leopold, as in a retrospective arrangment, a mirror within a mirror (hey, presto!), he beholdeth himself. That young figure of then is seen, precociously manly, walking on a nipping morning from the old house in Clambrassil street to the high school, his booksatchel on him bandolierwise, and in it a goodly hunk of wheaten loaf, a mother's thought. Or it is the same figure, a year or so gone over, in his first hard hat (ah, that was a day!), already on the road, a fullfeldged traveller for the family firm, equipped with an orderbook, a scented hakerchief (not for show only), his case of birght trinketware, (alas a thing now of the past!), and a quiverful of compliant smiles for this or that housewife reckoning it out upon her fingertips or for a budding virgin shyly scknowledging (but the heart? tell me!) his studied baisemoins. The scent, the smile but more than these, the dark eyes and oleaginous address brought home at duskfall many a commission to the head of the firm seated with Jacob's pipe after like labours in the paternal ingle (a meal of noodles, you may be sure, is aheating), reading through round horned spectacles some paper from the Europe of a month before. But hey, presto, the mirror is breathed on and the young knighterrant recedes, shrivels, to a tiny speck within the mist."

That, children, is Joyce.

Thanks for making my point.
Any english teacher would rip that up.
There are too many commas and run-on sentences.

Thanks for helping me remember why I quit reading Joyce and others like him.

Obviously someone has no appretiation of art. That is, frustrating.

That ad reminds me of an old Richard Prior bit.

Hi out there friends and neighbors. Has God touched you today? Well, if he hasn't, I tell you what you do...You send us a dollar, ninety five cents....

lol

Rock, I do appreciate the arts. I was just being a little too critical. Joyce is very eloquent and his descriptions are amazing.

I was just taught that a just because a description is lengthy, flowing and proselike, doesn't make it a palmary contribution to the common good. It just ends up being applesauce.
I could bombinate for a few more paragraphs...but I will stop for fear of breaking my own rule.