Plime is now in read-only mode and will remain as an archive of old plime activity.
This means you cannot login, post a comment or news post, edit your profile, etc.
 Only Science Teachers may call Creationism "Nonsense"
Only Science Teachers may call Creationism "Nonsense"
When a high school history teacher told his students that creationism was “superstitious nonsense,” he violated a student’s First Amendment rights, a Federal judge ruled this week. "Just as the government shouldn’t promote religion, he writes, the government shouldn’t actively disapprove of religion either." picked by equinox 3 years ago
tags creationism first ammendment superstitious nonsense
 quote edit #1 

  comments (9)  share edit history (0)
< 1 >
30
 chinook
3 years ago
Oh my goodness. These right wing Christian conservatives need to get a grip... no wait, a science lesson.

Creationism is about as accepted as the flat earth as theory.

I wonder if teachers may now get in trouble for referring to non-Christian gods as "fake gods" and the beliefs of ancients as superstitions? I certainly hope so, only for consistency's sake.
quote #2
30
 lynxears
3 years ago
« chinook : Oh my goodness. These right wing Christian conservatives need to get a grip... no wait, a science lesson.

Creationism is about as accepted as the flat earth as theory.

I wonder if teachers may now get in trouble for referring to non-Christian gods as "fake gods" and the beliefs of ancients as superstitions? I certainly hope so, only for consistency's sake.
Did you read it? He got in trouble for saying it in a way that was not geared toward education. His other comment on creationism, how it uses a logical fallacy, is considered permissable. He got in trouble for just dissing a religion, not creationism specifically, out of context of his lesson.

I'm actually ok with this ruling. Not thrilled, but appeased.
quote #3
52
 pocksuck...
3 years ago
Could be the reporting but this has got chuff all to do with the First Amendment.

It refers to this 1994 case.

The FA expressly refers to Congress passing laws.

Anything else is from subsequent interpretation.

And you could argue that, even if a teacher could be regarded as a representative of government, no law was being passed.

A Judge in any society would be viewed as occupying a higher office of government than a teacher and as precedent is an important aspect of law it could easily be argued that said Judge ruling against the right to free speech is a greater violation of FA rights than the teacher expressing his opinion was in respect to the student.
quote #4
25
 coldblad...
3 years ago
Right or wrong I just think its pathetic that we have to sue people over hurt feelings these days. If you're so confident in the righteousness of your convictions then who the hell cares what your History teacher says? Get over it you big pussies! Why are we raising a generation of sniveling whiners instead of responsible citizens capable of being themselves without the forced approval of their peers and mentors?!

f**k me this is dumb.
quote #5
About Plime
Plime is an editable wiki community where users can add and edit weird and interesting links. Users earn karma when other users vote on their actions. The more karma you have, the more power you have at Plime.

28
 BrownTro...
3 years ago
« coldbladed : ...why are we raising a generation of sniveling whiners instead of responsible citizens
Sorry to say but I think personal responsibility went out with the 1950's.

Besides that, we have a tort system that encourages these sort of frivolous lawsuits.
quote #6
25
 coldblad...
3 years ago
« BrownTrout : Sorry to say but I think personal responsibility went out with the 1950's.

Besides that, we have a tort system that encourages these sort of frivolous lawsuits.
I hear you. I almost feel like I have to earn a lot of money in a frivolous lawsuit just to make sure I can cover the bill if someone decides to sue me later.
quote #7
48
 2manyuse...
3 years ago
quote #8
12
 Interest...
3 years ago
« coldbladed : Right or wrong I just think its pathetic that we have to sue people over hurt feelings these days. If you're so confident in the righteousness of your convictions then who the hell cares what your History teacher says? Get over it you big pussies! Why are we raising a generation of sniveling whiners instead of responsible citizens capable of being themselves without the forced approval of their peers and mentors?!

f**k me this is dumb.
Uh-huh. Of course if a teacher said "evolution is a bunch of bull" then everyone would get up in arms. The thing is both are theories, both take a little bit of faith to believe, and neither have been scientifically proven. That's all there is to it. And Chinook: the "flat earth" idea has been disproved quite adequately scientifically and is universally accepted, but not everyone accepts evolution or creation. In fact there are several different theories for each belief as well. So that whole "flat earth" thing was a bad analogy...because not only do we know it is round, no-one has a theory about it being square.
quote #9
52
 pocksuck...
3 years ago
« Interesting:Uh-huh. Of course if a teacher said "evolution is a bunch of bull" then everyone would get up in arms. The thing is both are theories,
You really don't know what theory means, do you?

Surprised you didn't throw in the old gravity chestnut.

both take a little bit of faith to believe, and neither have been scientifically proven. That's all there is to it. And Chinook: the "flat earth" idea has been disproved quite adequately scientifically and is universally accepted
Oh really? Hardly fair of you to persistently ram your own beliefs down peoples throats and then piss all over someone else's.

Can anyone spell hypocrite?

but not everyone accepts evolution or creation. In fact there are several different theories for each belief as well. So that whole "flat earth" thing was a bad analogy...because not only do we know it is round, no-one has a theory about it being square.
Look, Interesting, I'm being lighthearted up above, but in all seriousness you can't compare evolution and creationism. It makes you look a fool.

Evolution has hard scientific fact on its side. It is observable, it is demonstrable and it can be recreated under laboratory conditions.

By contrast, creationism is based on a story in a book. It has no proof, no backing, nothing to convince anyone with an analytical mind that there is anything to it. And I will gladly add the caveat of "so far" to that. If someone finds something, anything, then it's not even a hypothesis.

And this is where your analogy falls down.

If a teacher said "evolution is a bunch of bull" then it would be lies. It would be contradictory to the evidence.

The evidence that creationism lacks.

Do you see?
quote #10
+ add a comment
< 1 >