retired_jmeshew

You completely misunderstood my reference to freedom of speech. I was referring to Bush's endorsement of the ID theory. It is an integral part of freedom of speech to be able to express one's personal beliefs, whether one is a politician or not. It has nothing to do with whether anyone agrees or not. And yes, believing in something that someone else considers false and stupid is a human right. Expressing it is freedom of speech, and I don't want that to ever vanish from the U.S. and no other U.S. citizen should. Right at the moment it might seem fine to say Bush shouldn't go on record endorsing something that smacks of religion, but that is a double-edged sword. With that sort of precedent, it might one day be those that are atheists who are prohibited from expressing those beliefs publicly. I don't want that, and I should hope that you don't either.

retired_babygirlgiggles

One day?

What about all those who were and are procecuted for blasphemy?

retired_jmeshew

Sorry, meant to get this in the last post. basically then, you are advocating nothing in schools except for hard math and science? Physics, geometry, anatomy, chemistry etc.? Because if education is all about facts, facts, facts, then we might as well toss all liberal arts right out the door. Under that rubric, we should no longer teach literature, history, social science, psychology, law, philosophy etc., because each of those disciplines (and others besides) rely on more than facts. Even science operates on theories, as you know. Higher math does as well. Should those things be discarded because they are not solely based on fact, facts, facts? Secondly, someone has to be the arbiter of facts, facts, facts. Who decides what is a fact and what is not? Or what fact should be taught and what shouldn't? True education has always been about more than facts, and if it ever gets reduced to simple, proveable, demonstrable facts, then it will be a sad world indeed.

retired_jmeshew

No one in the US is prosecuted for blasphemy any more, and quite frankly, I don't want to go back to that. It's not like that now, but it could return if people are not careful.

retired_jmeshew

You are right, can you find it in your heart to forgive me? How could I be so silly as to compare the floodgate scenario that comes from restricting freedom of speech with the floodgate that happens when players are named in LLM. It's an absolutely horrible comparison. In fact, how can I even be LLM, seeing as I am a product of the greatest conglomeration of evil the world has ever known? I'd have a better chance of LLming as a member of the SS or the Cheka.

KingsbayYHPE

SS? Pah, lightweights :cool:

retired_lapepe

The disbelief in religion can hardly be a religion. It's just an alternative view.

Thus I don't see how atheism can be defined as religion, as it rejects supernatural etc beings as our creators.

I never said that one should indoctrinate kids with the viewpoint of atheism and vehemently badtalk religion etc. I simply said that religion does not belong in the education system. If the parents want it, by all means send your children to church every sunday, or sunday-school, bible-studies, you name it. But why should everybody have to be spoon-fed this stuff, that is not based on science, which all other subjects are? Why should religion have this special position?

I don't know what the numbers are in the US, but here the great majority don't go to church regularly etc. So it's not really the minority that is being stamped on, but the majority.

retired_babygirlgiggles

Sorry, meant to get this in the last post. basically then, you are advocating nothing in schools except for hard math and science? Physics, geometry, anatomy, chemistry etc.? Because if education is all about facts, facts, facts, then we might as well toss all liberal arts right out the door. Under that rubric, we should no longer teach literature, history, social science, psychology, law, philosophy etc., because each of those disciplines (and others besides) rely on more than facts. Even science operates on theories, as you know. Higher math does as well. Should those things be discarded because they are not solely based on fact, facts, facts? Secondly, someone has to be the arbiter of facts, facts, facts. Who decides what is a fact and what is not? Or what fact should be taught and what shouldn't? True education has always been about more than facts, and if it ever gets reduced to simple, proveable, demonstrable facts, then it will be a sad world indeed. </BLOCKQUOTE>

Ofcourse I do realise that there are fields of science where the facts are less hard then in other fields of science. However I was trying to make a point that when there is science that it's useless to introduce some theory purely based on a religion.

And ofcourse your president has the right to say stupid things but we knew that already without him endorsing some make-up theory.

retired_jmeshew

Giz, fair enough. Besides, I never wanted to get into an ID vs. Evolution debate. I merely wanted to respond to some of the over the top, and baseless attacks on the U.S. that were going on in this thread. It went from a semi-reasonable discussion about U.S. foreign policy (and about which I can readily understand those that oppose it and why) to just slamming my country in every aspect of its being. Whether it was Pangaea ripping apart our educational system, or Kov equating the "American dream" with pornography.

Look, I'll just have to accept that there are a majority of folks on this forum who don't like the U.S. and aren't willing to grant it any redeeming qualities, and somehow try to pick up the pieces and go on . I'd rather it not get any more acerbic and threaten the fabric of the (at least) one thing we have a shared love for: LLM.

For those that really hate the U.S. (and don't live here- those that do, you are beyond all hope ), I'll extend a standing invitation to come visit me in Texas. I'll buy you a beer or six, and try to show you the good side of the United States .

retired_lapepe

First of all I didn't rip the US education system to bits, I think that falls on kov's shoulders IIRC

Second, there is a difference between hating the US, and criticising some of its policies. For some strange reason this distinction is almost impossible to grasp. Almost by definition, if you criticise the US, you hate it. I also criticised Norway, the UK and Europe, but nobody would say I hate them because of that criticism. If anything my criticising it means I care. The same is true of the US. I don't hate the US, but I do hate some of the aspects about US foreign policy.

I think this has been one of the best threads here for ages. And I think the debate and comments in the other threads are evidence of no hard feelings between any of us