Illegal to fail students if they believe in certain myths as opposed to facts?

myp said:

It is funny that you think you know more about how I feel than I do- that says something. (regarding me respecting your opinion)

Click to expand...

Oh, I don't know you, that then makes your prejudice comments valid. Out isn't about how you feel it is about what you said.

myp said:

As for the law at hand, if anything it is unconstitutional, not the other way around because of separation of church and state. The 1st amendment doesn't apply to schools in case you didn't know- you can't go into a public school and say obscenities without punishment, for example. And you certainly can't go preach about creationism. But this isn't even about preaching- it is about tests, etc. and wrong answers are wrong answers- wrong answers are also not protected by 1st amendment rights :

Click to expand...

Funny you think a school can tell a kid that he can't be convicted to his beliefs on the basis that it is disrespectful to yours. Sounds like you don't want a separation of church and state but a state that beats down a church by failing kids for not agreeing with you're non fact. Stool haven't seen any proof what so ever.

myp said:

Then stop responding?


Again, what makes you the judge of this debate? I can say these same things about you.

Click to expand...

you told me to stop responding because you can't debate, I think I am more credible a judge of it than you. You don't understand my position you insult that which you don't understand I was in a debate you were engaged in prejudiced behavior.

I will quit posting when you either ban me, produce this proof you keep touting or become so frustrated you ban me or sick your moderator on me. Or you quit with your dishonesty and undated of posting this as a debate tactic you state that anybody that disagrees with you is stupid.

myp said:

Might want to start by looking at the data to see what is real and what is not :giggle:

Click to expand...

I have, it isn't conclusive. If what you claim is real with no doubt you could prove it, you haven't you are either a liar, a charlatan or you haves some info that I don't. If it is the third then produce it and end this argument. End it world wide, go show it to the state of Louisiana or shut up.

The debate was over two pages ago, now we are just having a pissing contest. You want me to quit posting, ban me.

myp said:

So once more you think you know more about my position than I do. Well, everyone can see what the real truth is in this matter- my opinion is obviously my own and not yours. I stand by the separation of church and state, not the state bashing the church as you describe my position. And obviously I am the best source on what I believe- you don't need to delve into philosophy to understand that

Click to expand...

two lies, you only stand by separation of church and state when it benefits secularism, actually you support secularism as the only religion. Because separation is a two way street.

And your second lie I am going by what yousaid, either you believe religious people are idiots and you are superior, or everything you posted is a lie.

It is obvious that there is no truth here, you continue to debate, why would you if I was debating something proven wrong? The debate rages on, state legislators are debating on weather your truth is truth, if it was truth how could you debate it? Seems like there is gaping holes in your truth, making it not truth. So I don't think anybody accept those that are in your religion will agree with you. I have seen for people agree with me, I have seen only two agree with you. So you either think your users are idiots or you know your belief isn't fact.

If you could prove evolution without a doubt then you would certainly get a Nobel prize, why hold back? Oh wait its because you can't prove it, I forgot:giggle:

myp said:

Uh, no, I suggested you stop responding because you said, and I quote, "I am not interested in debating with you any longer"

Click to expand...

The debate was over three pages ago when you showed your true belief, I am just expressing my opinion on charlatans. If you want me to stop, then ban me, but otherwise youneed to just accept that people don't agree with you.

myp said:

The proof is there. Go look it up- you have the Internet at your fingertips- I have already told you what broadly constitutes the proof. But the problem is really your methodology, or lack thereof as you think everything is opinion (and in the realm of test-taking, apparently equal opinion since you don't want to penalize anything [or at least not creationism which is undoubtedly less true at the least than evolution]). It actually might be a hypocritical position because you still have not addressed why 1+1=3 shouldn't be okay on a test too- that tells me you draw the line for universal fact somewhere and if you are in fact using the methodology (or lack thereof) that you described, then in reality even that should be an acceptable alternative to 1+1=2 on a test.

Click to expand...

I will not entertain this stupidity any more, until you tell me which religion is centered around 1+1=3. It isn't the same thing. Prove it you lie and misrepresent things as gospel, out only is because your prejudice dictates it must.

myp said:

Why is it not conclusive and 1+1=2 is? What is your methodology for determining that? Or do you just pick and choose what to believe as you described and expect the world to fall in line with your opinion?

Click to expand...

I thought this was simple enough the first time I explained it. You pick one applethem you pick one more that equals two apples. Lets try with evolution, you pick one apple, then you pick another one, then you have proof of evolution??? It doesn't work.

myp said:

The religion of myp. Last I checked the 1st amendment allows for free practice of religion. So there it is- my religion says 1+1=3. Is that all it takes to shatter your whole illogical methodology?

Click to expand...

that isn't a religion.

myp said:

Who says? If someone's religion says creationism is true and evolution is not, why can't mine say 1+1=3? From the 1st amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

Click to expand...

What religion is that?

myp said:

The religion of myp. Or are you going to tell me I can't have a religion that says 1+1=3 and deny my first amendment right in doing so?

Click to expand...

To be fare, he can deny your hypothetical religion all he wants. The Constitution only applies to the Federal and state gov'ts. A private citizen can't violate your Constitutional rights because they don't exist outside the scope of gov't.

myp said:

Well I am hardly asking Polydectes if he approves of my religion- I am asking him if he thinks the Constitution protects it- and it certainly does. So someone can believe 1+1=3 and the government will protect that right. Now if we apply his school/test belief exclusion, then someone with the belief 1+1=3 can't be marked off or failed for writing that on a math test instead of 1+1=2.

Click to expand...

In my opinion, when we as a society stop teaching our youth what is real and applicable to the lives they will be living.....we have failed them. Education has a purpose, which must be paid attention to:

ed·u·ca·tion

[ej-oo-key-shuh n] Show IPA
noun 1. the act or process of imparting or acquiring general knowledge, developing the powers of reasoning and judgment, and generally of preparing oneself or others intellectually for mature life.

2. the act or process of imparting or acquiring particular knowledge or skills, as for a profession.

3. a degree, level, or kind of schooling: a university education.

4. the result produced by instruction, training, or study: to show one's education.

5. the science or art of teaching; pedagogics.

Imparting to or teaching the young information that is proven false will in no way add to the ability to function as an adult in society, and should thus be avoided. This does not mean we must damage the faith of a child, but does require teachers to point out erroneous understanding of fact as agreed upon by the curriculum.
Should a parent wish to avoid this education due to religious belief, there are many schools to choose from that have different standards outside the public school system.

Yes...it makes little sense in the context of society at large, this is indisputable, and should be common sense.

This argument (perhaps debate), however seems to have entered the realm of position, rather than the original topic.

An impasse has resulted...he thinks you are trying to prevent religious thought.

You think he is trying to promote it...and both are correct.


But, it seems to me the basic issue is not who is right, it revolves around what we teach.

The the kids should be taught what we know....not what we think, unless its a philosophy class.

myp said:

The religion of myp. Or are you going to tell me I can't have a religion that says 1+1=3 and deny my first amendment right in doing so?

Click to expand...

There is no such religion, you can't just invent a religion and pretend it protects you from reality. Otherwise people would invent religions to commit crime.

Does the religion of myp have any tenets or guidelines or any structure at all our us out some bogus hypothetical that you think is clever?

If you could come up with a real religion that would make this hypothetical not just a complete dodge and a wormy little way of supporting your ridiculous argument.

No religion would say that mathematics have a new function. If so what is the spiritual significance?

This proves not only do you not understand religion you don't even understand the purpose of it. You have no place in this debate, everything you say is biased against religion and you repeatedly said you weren't, you are a liar and you have no credibility.

tecoyah said:

Yes...it makes little sense in the context of society at large, this is indisputable, and should be common sense.

This argument (perhaps debate), however seems to have entered the realm of position, rather than the original topic.

An impasse has resulted...he thinks you are trying to prevent religious thought.

You think he is trying to promote it...and both are correct.


But, it seems to me the basic issue is not who is right, it revolves around what we teach.

The the kids should be taught what we know....not what we think, unless its a philosophy class.

Click to expand...

I never said that we should teach kids anything that isn't at least based in science, just that we shouldn't fail them for beliefs, it sounds vindictive. I don't understand how anybody can be behind that, apparently I am not alone because there is discussion on pasting a law. Besides beliefs don't make you uneducated, as I repeatedly said the school I attended was a college prep school that taught creation, 95% of my class continued to college.

My position is that it shouldn't be an offense that merits failure to stand by Christian beliefs, this is a nation of mostly Christian, Jewish, and Muslim people. Our education system shouldn't be used to engineer that out of the people. Something as unimportant as evolution shouldn't be this debated. And certainly the acceptance thereof shouldn't be 31% of school, I would call that punitive. Especially since our public school system is almost a complete failure.

myp said:

Well I am hardly asking Polydectes if he approves of my religion- I am asking him if he thinks the Constitution protects it- and it certainly does. So someone can believe 1+1=3 and the government will protect that right. Now if we apply his school/test belief exclusion, then someone with the belief 1+1=3 can't be marked off or failed for writing that on a math test instead of 1+1=2.

Click to expand...

No the constitution doesn't protect artificial religions based on rewriting math. That doesn't even fit the definition of a religion, there is no spiritual doctrine, no cultural relevance. Nothing

Now if you suggested that Christians upheld that belief, then you would have a place to stand. But if you want to invent a religion that creates this fallacy that is your business. If you created it to defame religion you only defame yourself. If a major religion said such, it wouldn't be a major religion and likely not a practiced religion in the United states because religion isn't about rewriting everything. Many Christians, I would say the majority, vast majority accept evolution, because it does have merit, nearly all Christians I know accept it and see it as having no conflict with creation, in fact they see it as a means or an engine of creation.

Now if you are using the Westborough baptist church as the example our similar fundamentalists you are not informed on christianity, because that is about 2% of Christians. Why fight them? Let them make fools of themselves.

myp said:

I agree with you, but I believe Polydectes' point is that everyone decides subjectively what is and is not real- basically everything is opinion. I am trying to show why that is an illogical stance to take as far as schools go by applying that position to something that even he would probably find unacceptable.

Click to expand...

If that is what you are trying to prove you are terrible at it, because I never suggested that schools use that method. In fact I support the teaching of evolution in school as I have repeatedly said over and over again. This is why I say that you don't understand my agreement, because you have no idea what it is. That is apparent by this post. Please go through all of my posts and prove where I suggested that schools teach by such a methods that would be interesting to see how you dreamed up this nonsense.

What I am arguing is that a child that refuses to accept evolution isn't stupid, but convicted to his belief. Evolution is easy enough to follow and the child probably understands it, he just refuses to accept it. Mainly because it conflicts with his religion. So by failing a student meaning they don't get a diploma, that is what failing school is you are in effect engineering school to stamp out christianity. That shouldn't be the purpose of school, because there is a separation of church and state.

Now if this was to forbid a teacher from making a question off on a test that is absurd, but that isn't the law. The law says it is illegal to fail students for this belief. I agree that it should be illegal to fail kids for beliefs, that is merging of church and state. It is unconstitutional to fail kids for their beliefs. The first amendment is a double edged sword.

This is also a 9th amendment issue. If the state of Louisiana wants to allow this to be a right they can, because not all rights are listed in the constitution. It doesn't violate anybody else's first amendment rights. It doesn't hurt an atheist student, or an agnostic student or a student that completely accepts evolution. It doesn't force religion on anyone it doesn't entangle the school in with the church. Unless you can prove that someone's first amendment rights are violated by a believer not being failed over their beliefs, you have no agreement.

If this is some slippery slope crap, I don't put much merit in slippery slope arguments, they are highly reliant on assumption and over reaction. It normally comes from personal objection to the people that propose such laws.

You referred to creationists as charlatans, and foolish, its apparent you are bringing your personal objection into political discussion. Your right to object is yours, but you can't suspend others rights because you don't like what they believe. You live in a nation that is mostly Christian, so the rights should protect you from oppression, frankly I think they do. I don't see how it would be oppressive to you if little Jonny Jesus freak doesn't fail because he doesn't accept evolution.

Polydectes said:

you can't just invent a religion

Click to expand...

Aside from every religion in history, you're correct.

David said:

Aside from every religion in history, you're correct.

Click to expand...

Religion is typically a reflection of culture, and it comes from people but it is a cultural device to help people coexist.

Dreaming up something to fight coexistence isn't what religion is.