Why choose one or the other when you can have the benefit of both?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N0help4u

It depends, but I am not going to take any preventative shots.

---

Did you have any as a child? The polio vaccine?

The few they gave in the 50's and 60's when I was little. Then it was probably less than a dozen. NOW they give an average of 49 vaccines before age 6 and many are vaccines that babies and children are not ready for.
I am 58, I am healthier than most and do not take any medications, have no real health problems. Most people I know, even kids have diabetes, fatty liver, obese, need an inhaler, take 3 to 20 meds, etc...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N0help4u

kids have diabetes, fatty liver, obese, need an inhaler, take 3 to 20 meds, etc......

---

But that's not because of the vaccines.

The kids I know who were exempted from vaccines (by their parents) are way healthier than the kids that got all the vaccines.

You need a different perspective. Religion tells you the why, Science researches the how. These are not in conflict since religion provides very little detail and science tries to fill in that detail. Einstein said; I just want to know the thoughts of God everything else is just the detail.

The problem we have is absolutism, that man wants to say that the view that they have formed is absolute truth rather than their perspective on truth. Evolution is a theory which is yet to be proved but when you examine the detail of what exists here you have to see more than dumb multiplication of cells or pond scum becoming a human being, If pond scum could become a human being why do we still have pond scum?

Precisely Paaclete!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

If pond scum could become a human being why do we still have pond scum?

---

Where did the Grand Canyon come from? God made it just like that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N0help4u

The kids I know who were exempted from vaccines (by their parents) are way healthier than the kids that got all the vaccines.

---

And many have died from measles and other diseases they should have gotten inoculated against. And just because those kids are healthy doesn't mean it was because they didn't get the vaccines. My kids did get them (not 46!) and have always been healthy, alarmingly healthy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Where did the Grand Canyon come from? God made it just like that?

---

I don't think anyone suggested that there haven't been physical changes on the Earth since creation arising from erosion, volcanic activity and so forth, what you are debating is when did it all start and at what point did Genesis 1.1-2 become Genesis 1:3,etc. What is debated is what is the process of creation.

As to the Grand Canyon a massive release of water at the end of the ice age could have carved the canyon just as easily as a small river could have over millions of years. I don't know which view requires the greater faith

It's the parents choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N0help4u

Its the parents choice.

---

Unfortunately.

What we must strive for in education is a balanced view, therefore both views should be taught. If they are incompatiable then they are taught as different subjects, but the debate which arises is as important as the teaching of absolutes.

Hello clete:

Quote:

---

What we must strive for in education is a balanced view, therefore both views should be taught.

---

I agree. All viewpoints need to be taught... But, in THIS case, one ISN'T a viewpoint.. It's RELIGION... It's a GREAT story, but it's RELIGION.. It SHOULD be taught, where RELIGION is taught, which in church.

Excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello clete:
I agree. All viewpoints need to be taught... But, in THIS case, one ISN'T a viewpoint.. It's RELIGION... It's a GREAT story, but it's RELIGION.. It SHOULD be taught, where RELIGION is taught, which in church.

excon

---

I think it should be at least mentioned as an "opposing viewpoint."

As long as its not on the test, mention away, but if someone wants to mention another religion is that okay too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

As long as its not on the test, mention away, but if someone wants to mention another religion is that okay too?

---

A native American story of creation or two?

Creation/Migration/Origin Stories

Hello again, Carol:

Quote:

---

I think it should be at least mentioned as an "opposing viewpoint."

---

Tal is right.. Which religions opposing viewpoint of creation should be mentioned? All of them? Why should ANY religion be mentioned in a science class?

Excon

Tell me yours, I will tell you mine. What? You don't believe in mine?? Screw you too!! End of conversation, start of the war of the gods.

This is a contensious issue but the theory of evolution doesn't stand the test of fact and should not be taught as fact but as an explanation of some observations.

Religion is essentially interested in the recent past and the relationship between human beings and their creator. Science seeks to explain certain observed occurrences. The contention appears to be in the reference to in the beginning and there are many references to this in all cultures. Science has difficulty proving God because they cannot observe him.

Now Tal has just become irritated and I can understand this point of view, this is why religion has it's own board here.

What is irrational is the attempt to exclude religion and its point of view from any discussion in education of origins. An examination of Scriptures indicates a depth of knowledge that must have come from somewhere yet it arose in a society that didn't have science as we understand it. The viewpoint is therefore valid and I for one reject that "evolution" is the only explanation of origins. I will allow adaptation because this is observable but it doesn't explain origin. We have created many breeds of dog in a short time but by breeding dogs we have not created a cat or a bear