Isn't it just as "extremist" to say there is no God and only scientists can dictate reality?

Question

So, the Kansas board of education is thinking changes should be implimented that don't teach kids the evolution specifically posited by Darwin and most scientists. We inadvertantly teach children the only thing that matters is the kind of evidence supported by scientific observation, and we indirectly tell them anything spiritual or religious is mere dogmatism. We give them textbooks that make claims such as no evidence refutes evolution as posited by Darwin, as if scientists are the dictators of reality. When someone wants to change this, the scientific community is suddenly in an uproar, they threaten with legal action, refuse the use of textbooks, make news statements designed to embarrass the people who believe in God, and atheists support scientists to further eliminate all beliefs that are not supported by the scientific method. Is this not as extremist as religious fanatics who claim only the bible tells the "true" story? Isn't it radical empiricism vs. religious fanaticism?

It's so funny how Yahoo has both its religious and atheistic fanatics.

~~~~

Very funny how atheists can rant all they want but God forbid someone who isn't a radical empiricist has something to say about spirituality.

Democracy = Don't tell our kids there may be a God? Please!

Notice how nobody has actually answered my initial question?

~~~~

Just look at some of the "answers" below! Atheists are ready to burn anyone who challenges Darwin's theories at the stake !

~~~~

Since when is the prerequisite for being a scientist that you must be an atheist and disbelieve religious doctrine?

tuberoot's answer below is sby far the worst. Come on you Darwinists! You've got to do better than saying "there's no room in a science class for alternate theories..."

~~~~

Here's a much better question for you ardent atheists:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ag6wP.QiS.nlqv3Q5ATbgJz59xd.?qid=20070213075705AAGb0Z4

~~~~

Scientific genius from below says:

"Most atheists accept evolution because it has been scientifically shown to be correct."

"Correct" is not the same thing as a scientific proof unless you are someone who insists the world is 100% logical. And by the way, you also proved those who support "evolution" also defend "Darwinian evolution."

I never said I oppose science, but you reveal yourself as a radical extremist when you suggest someone who asks the questions I do is not "open" to studying science, which I have. You indicate you're not "open" to understanding reality from any but the scientific way, and that's a form of extremism.

No news article said the school system in Kansas was going to NOT teach evolution. The change was proposed for HOW is evolution being taught, and that is what atheists fear the most: a challenge to radical empiricism.

~~~~

Answer 1

Wow! Look at some of your answers! It's as if you insulted the pope to his face!

Yes, Evolution is just another religion. And it's believers come out of the woodwork to discourage those with a contrary voice. The school system was tainted at the same time as the courts and the rest of the government was tainted-- merely because they did not recognize the Theory of Evolution as being the religion that it is.

So now we have a state recognized religion-- that is disguised as a science. There isn't any proof, only claims as to it's validity-- just like other religions.

So we are in the midst of the political struggle that others may have had when the Roman Catholic Church was recognized as the state church in Europe and other parts of the world, and the Anglican church of England.

Any dissenting voice is told to be quiet, stay out of circulation of the state, remove itself from the public property, under the threat of being scrutinized by the government who recognized what religion it would support.

Through reading of the Inquisitions and other writings that had to do with government recognized religions one thing stands out to me; that those that find themselves in power and support the 'church' of Evolution will only attempt to get even more power and control over what others do.

So cheer up, it's going to get worse. ( ;

Answer 2

The answer to your question is no and yes (you actually ask two questions)

Is it extremist to say there is no god? Of course not. That would mean just saying there is a god is also extremist.

Is it extremist for only scientists to be able to dictate reality? YES. But this doesn't happen. Reality dictates reality. Scientists study it.

You make some seriously flawed statements. 'claims such as no evidence refutes evolution as posited by Darwin, as if scientists are the dictators of reality' has several flaws. Firstly the theory of evolution that is currently used is not the one posited by Darwin. It's pretty close, but as with Newton's theory of gravity it has been developed. Secondly, there is no evidence refuting evolution. The stuff the creationists keep quoting on Y!A is not scientific. Scientists have no problem at all with evolution being disproved - they'd welcome it as it would improve their knowledge and understanding. However there is NO evidence against the theory. And if it was wrong it would be very easy to disprove.

'they threaten with legal action, refuse the use of textbooks, make news statements designed to embarrass the people who believe in God, and atheists support scientists to further eliminate all beliefs that are not supported by the scientific method'

Genius... Atheism is not science. Don't confuse the two. Most atheists accept evolution because it has been scientifically shown to be correct. If a religion claims that science goes against its core beliefs then the religion is wrong! However, evolution does not do this. The Catholic Church (and the majority of mainstream churches) accept evolution. If you are embarrassed by science then you need to re-evaluate your views. Perhaps you're misinterpreting the Bible (it certainly seems that way, when the Pope and the Vatican have no problem).

The difference between the 'religious fanatics who claim only the bible tells the "true" story' and scientists is that the scientists will accept the facts. Whereas the religious fanatics will only accept a book written thousands of years ago and then re-written and translated several times to the point that theologians can spend all their time arguing over the meaning.

I'm sorry that you are so easily embarrassed by science. But maybe you should allow yourself to openly study some of what you blindly oppose.

Answer 3

Evolution is an important part of biology. By refusing to teach children in public schools evolution, Kansas is putting its students at disadvantage when they go into higher education. Also the reason scientists get in an up roar when someone tries to change science is because science is a rigid field of study. If a new idea comes along it has to be confirmed by peer reviewed several times before it is accepted as science and put in science text books. But fear not, if you want your children to learn about spirituality you can still do. Just show up at the religious institution of choice and sure they will educate your children on the spiritual world.

Answer 4

I think there is an important distinction in that you shouldn't teach non-scientific ways of interpreting the world in a science class. Science is not dictating reality so much as investigating it using a set formula that requires verifiable proofs that can be repeated by everyone, not dependent on divine revelation that is subjective between those who experience it. There is no evidence that I know of that supports creationists theory, they merely try to poke holes in evolutionary theory and say if that is wrong or we don't understand then God must have done it. This is not science. You are free to teach this to your children independently or to teach it in a religion or philosophy class but it does not belong in science class. So no if it is not supported by the scientific method it does not belong in the science class, thats why its science and not religion or philosophy.

Answer 5

Science is an attempt to explain the universe in terms of natural laws not supernatural ones. As such, there is no room for religion in science classrooms. You'll have to find another venue for your dying ideas.

Answer 6

A biology class is supposed to teach biology. The vast majority of the world scientists believe that evolution occurred. There is no place for teaching magic in a science class.

Answer 7

Evolution of species is a fact not a theory. The biological mechanisms involved are all that are theoretical. Why would you dispute that children should be taught scientific facts?

Answer 8

Actually we teach philosophy as well to cover the things that science does not cover. No need for religion here.

Also would it be fair to start teaching fairy tales and fables in religious classes. They have the same messages as many of the parables.

Answer 9

If you even ADMIT that religious beliefs aren't supported by the scientific method, then why do you think those beliefs have a place in science class?

Answer 10

atheists think they can push christians down. claiming that there is no proof. when in actuallity, they have no proof either.
in this situation no one wins. but the ones that lose are the children in schools reading things that only science can "theorize." schools will ultimately teach a theory rather than a religion. in fear of offending. its sad really. but society has alot of outspoken atheists that seem to get closer at winning a battle. but they wont win the war.