Dawkins, though a brilliant biologist, is a real prick. He makes the rest of us atheists look bad.
The program sounds silly off the bat (and is certainly not going to get any of THIS atheist's money), but I don't want to comment on it without more information. Can you give the source for your quote?
In general, I think it's sad that people on both sides use public schools as a battleground for their political wars.
EDIT:
Thanks, pretty lady!
I found the article here:
http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,1958138,00.html
It appears as if the materials his foundation is distributing only address Intelligent Design from the general viewpoint of the scientific community (ie: As far as science goes, it's neither right nor wrong. It's just not science.). From what I can gather, the materials do not address religion or the concept of God in any way, only scientific value of ID. The materials are being designed and distributed in direct response to education packets developed by Truth in Science, a Creationist organization. According to the article, these packets are currently in use in 59 schools in the UK.
Of course, I don't have the whole story, but that's what I'm getting from this. If this is the case, he's doing his job as a scientist and educator, not "taking the fight against God into the classroom.
Either way, he's still a prick. Let the kids learn science in their science classes, and leave the politics out of it. That goes for everyone.
2007-07-16 10:14:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by marbledog 6
·
8⤊
0⤋
>"The oxford professor (Richard Dawkins) and campaigning atheists are planning to take their fight against God into the classroom by flooding schools with anti-religious literature."
It is difficult for me to know what this means, as anything that attacks religion is about religion, and is therefore not allowed in public schools. Perhaps this was not meant to be taken literally, just like the bible.
>The article in this magazine goes on to say that Dawkins plans to set up a charity that "will subsidise books, pamphlets and DVD's attacking the 'educational scandal" of theories such as creationalism ....."
This is nothing that theists do not already do all the time, and so is nothing special to care about.
2007-07-16 10:11:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by Fred 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
I think someone is exaggerating here.
Richard Dawkins, like anyone else, can make DVDs, pamphlets, books, and whatever else he likes to promote his point of view.
He may also make them accessible to libraries, schools, etc., if the material meets certain standards.
Making scientific material for schools has generally been allowed if it is just science. Many schools are in need of various media in support of the hard sciences, even private schools.
It could be that since Dawkins is an atheist, many Christians, would assume that his books, DVDs, and what have you, will be anit-Christian.
The key here is that Dawkins, and most scientists do not believe or support creationism. If Dawkins does not argue against it, he loses credibility in the scientific world and the educational system. If he does argue against creationism, many Christians would cry Foul!
While there is a difference between religion and science, being part of one does not make you anti-religion or anti-science.
The problem is not in Dawkins' literature, but in the minds of some Christians.
Rob
2007-07-16 12:01:48
·
answer #3
·
answered by barefoot_rob1 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think many things cross the line. Some of our fellow believers do too. I have (cross the line) I have heard fellow believers say we should have prayer in school. I say NO. I do not want anyone teaching others children about religion. If they have Christian prayer then that gives other the right to bring in Muslim type prayers. Government needs to stay out of religion and believers in something else, Christian believers and atheists needs to stay out of each other business.
I realize that some things will always cross the line a little. As in Darwin's Theory of Evolution. Thank God I don't have any children because the idea of someone teaching that to my children is repugnant. I find this as repugnant as other people find God.
I wish we could just respect each others beliefs.
2007-07-16 10:37:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by Patti C 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
hrm, flaw in your question >>> Most who answered, their answers were not even their own thoughts, Maybe from books???? >>> Yes the ideas ARE based upon something that someone has proven and they were read out of books. What is someone just supposed to sit down and say "this is evolution" and just hope it is the correct answer? The point of science is to speculate what if, test the idea, and either prove yay or nay to that idea. And yes those ideas WERE recorded in books, it's called history, and it's good to write down... After all the bible is an interpretation of a story that someone a LONG time ago wrote down.... so you may not buy the fact that some people will read a science book, and "get it" and "buy" the ideas in the book etc.. but that is where belief systems come from, research and ideas of other people that are either proven or expanded upon. (Even your bible is based upon that). The main thing though is that scientists dont just say "this is right and everything else is wrong" however Religion does, and considering there are a few 1000 "religions" in the world (one of which is called scientology) they cannot all be right, so how can you be sure Christianity is the right one if you dont question it?
2016-05-19 04:29:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by yessenia 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Two things:
1. Dawkins is a bit of a prat.
2. He is English. Putting religious/anti religious literature into English schools is, believe it or not, not an issue for the US Supreme court!
It is his response to a perceived flooding of schools with religious leaflets. Just like the fundie Christians he thinks everyone on "the other side" spends every minute of everyday plotting to undermine him. He thinks you ARE plotting the same manoevre! Fortunately schoolteachers aren't complete idiots and can spot a propoganda pamphlet from either side and aren't letting this sort of **** in.
2007-07-16 10:22:51
·
answer #6
·
answered by anthonypaullloyd 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Christian do this very thing all the time. This is atheists fighting back and trying to preserve the separation of church and state. Creationism is a religious believe that is in no way supported by science and should not be taught in schools. The big bang at least has scientific basis and should be taught in school. Your writing this as if you think atheism is a religion. It is not. All public schools should teach as if atheist because that would be true separation of church and state.
2007-07-16 10:14:19
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
You have been doing that for years and years and decades and centuries, etc. You have forced Christianity down the throats of people using the point of a sword, the bullets out of guns, and the fear and reality of torture. It is amazing that even look at the currency, with the statement "In God we Trust". How much more can you infringe on our lives? But when someone finally pushes back, you and your group of Christians feel that it is infringing on your rights. Well, welcome to reality and just a small dose of what has been happening to atheists throughout history. We have been murdered, tortured, forced to convert (or die), etc. and finally we are pushing back, and you do not like the taste of your own medicine, do you? Evolution has been taught in schools because there is much more supportive evidence of evolution, than some thing flying around in the sky waving his magic wand and poof.........creating life out of nothing. The church has constantly and continues to step over the line of church and state, so until the church stops, then obviously atheists need to protect ourselves from Christians and Christianity.
2007-07-16 10:21:08
·
answer #8
·
answered by corona001500 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
It would be so much more helpful if you could say which magazine or newspaper printed this story. How can one make a judgement without all the facts? I don't know if this is true, but I will not just accept it as fact without some skepticism. If I knew the name of the magazine, I could check this out online and see what the truth really is. Could you provide that to me?
2007-07-16 12:01:25
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
First of all, you must understand that atheists are not in any way aligned with each other or organized like religions are. Their thoughts and actions are completely independent, and reflect only the ideas of the individual.
That being said, I feel that anyone who tries to force unproven theory into public schools is wrong. Kids should be taught facts, based on scientific research, period.
Issues of spirituality, and it's unique particulars, do not belong in public schools as fact. It cannot be proven, so it cannot be factual.
Conversely, anti-religious fervor serves no purpose either. Extremism on any level rarely proves fruitful, and almost inevitably serves to hurt someone or some group of people in the process.
Keep your beliefs close to your own heart, and answer questions only when asked. Life is hard enough without people jamming their unprovable beliefs down anyone's throat.
2007-07-16 10:58:47
·
answer #10
·
answered by wrdsmth495 4
·
0⤊
1⤋