NationStates Jolt Archive

I had a conversation with a friend today about the teaching of Creationism (or its new incarnation, Intelligent Design) in public schools as an "alternative" to evolution theory. Christian groups are the primary, if not the only, backers of such "alternatives," and this led to an interesting thought:

Many of the pro-Creationism Christian groups in America are also the folks who continually seek to advance abstinence-only sex education programs. Even in the face of recent evidence that such programs are ineffective, and possibly even lead to increased rates of high-risk sexual practices, these groups insists that the best way to protect young people from unwanted pregnancy and disease is to teach them ONLY to abstain from sexual activity.

But...

These people claim to believe in immaculate conception.

They want us to teach their Creation theory as an "alternate theory" to evolution, so shouldn't we also teach their "alternate theory" of human reproduction? Shouldn't we explain that babies sometimes come from a mommy and a daddy who love each other so much the love makes a baby, and also sometimes come from their omnipotent Creator's love of prime 14-year-old virgin tail? Shouldn't we let young girls know that abstaining from sex might even make God more likely to impregnate them as a reward for their virtue and purity?

I mean, if we're going to teach alternate theories, why not go all the way? (Yes, that was a pun, sue me :))

Here is my theory: The shit hit the fan, thus we exist.

Here is my theory: The shit hit the fan, thus we exist.

Well, since it is entirely possible that we are a universe that existed in its Big Bang state on a piece of shit, and by hitting the fan it started the big bang and our universe, that is plausible. ;)

:D Cute...I'll have to throw this one out, next time I find myself bickering with one of Them.

Well, since it is entirely possible that we are a universe that existed in its Big Bang state on a piece of shit, and by hitting the fan it started the big bang and our universe, that is plausible. ;)
Am I every wrong?

I think it's shocking that anyone who believes in creationism could believe that the sun is the center of the solar system. It clearly states in the bible that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still. He didn't tell the earth to stand still. This "proves" that the earth is the center of the solar system.

And I demand equal time for the Australian theory of unintelligent design, where, as everyone knows, the world was created by a giant snake called the Rainbow Serpent. Now I'm not picking on the Rainbow Serpent here, but how many snakes do you know that could be described as intelligent? I am shocked at the insensitivity of the intelligent design crowd that they ignore all those people whose gods are unintelligent. They should at once change the name of their theory to intelligent/unintelligent design.

Am I every wrong?

Nope. I guess that makes you God! :cool:

I demand equal time for the teaching of Intelligent Design by the Invisible Pink Unicorn...AND the Invisible Pink Pony...and the Invisible Fire-Breathing Dragon In My Garage.

I think the universe is in a state of perpetual expansion and contraction. As matter spreads, and entropy rears it's ugly head, matter and energy eventually shift to heat. As the universe crunches together again, supercondensing into a particle of unstable matter, the universe ends. Only to explode anew.

So, to answer your question, we're probably a rerun. :)

They want us to teach their Creation theory as an "alternate theory" to evolution, so shouldn't we also teach their "alternate theory" of human reproduction? Shouldn't we explain that babies sometimes come from a mommy and a daddy who love each other so much the love makes a baby, and also sometimes come from their omnipotent Creator's love of prime 14-year-old virgin tail? Shouldn't we let young girls know that abstaining from sex might even make God more likely to impregnate them as a reward for their virtue and purity?

**This is God, and I approve of this thread!**

I would like to see Lamarckism taught as an alternate theory. There is some proof. I read about an experiement where they trained worms to associate a series of strong vibrations with feeding. These worms were then chopped up and fed to their children, who were able to learn to associate the two things faster than their parents.

**This is God, and I approve of this thread!**
Crap, you do exist?! Um, I swear those nuns were like that when I got there...

:D Cute...I'll have to throw this one out, next time I find myself bickering with one of Them.Don't forget to add that Jesus is a liberal! :eek:

I had a conversation with a friend today about the teaching of Creationism (or its new incarnation, Intelligent Design) in public schools as an "alternative" to evolution theory. Christian groups are the primary, if not the only, backers of such "alternatives," and this led to an interesting thought:

Many of the pro-Creationism Christian groups in America are also the folks who continually seek to advance abstinence-only sex education programs. Even in the face of recent evidence that such programs are ineffective, and possibly even lead to increased rates of high-risk sexual practices, these groups insists that the best way to protect young people from unwanted pregnancy and disease is to teach them ONLY to abstain from sexual activity.

But...

These people claim to believe in immaculate conception.

They want us to teach their Creation theory as an "alternate theory" to evolution, so shouldn't we also teach their "alternate theory" of human reproduction? Shouldn't we explain that babies sometimes come from a mommy and a daddy who love each other so much the love makes a baby, and also sometimes come from their omnipotent Creator's love of prime 14-year-old virgin tail? Shouldn't we let young girls know that abstaining from sex might even make God more likely to impregnate them as a reward for their virtue and purity?

I mean, if we're going to teach alternate theories, why not go all the way? (Yes, that was a pun, sue me :))
I hates them crazy Christians. They give sane Christians a bad name. Why don't these people realize that much of the bible is to be taken figurativly?