God is pure goodness and the Spirit Bomb doesn’t work on those that are pure goodness so no matter how strong the spirit bomb is it wouldn’t work on him anyway.
A scientist objecting to dogmatism being fed to children, how inappropriate!
If teaching about religion was about expending the children’s horizons, why don’t they teach them about all religions? They only teach them the one the want them to actively practice.
Maybe Nimbus is pickier then Spirit Bomb? Maybe Roshi just doesn’t know what he’s talking about? This is a guy who forgot his immortal phoenix died, and somehow lost his live in maid/bank robber.
calling it child abuse is pushing your ideals onto others in the most vile wording possible. hes pushing his views that people shouldn’t be allowed to teach their children they want to. you dont find that ironic at all?
The amount of damage depends on how much of a religious nut the parents are. If you want to see his points more clearly, you need to look at the biggest offenders, to realize how a parent can ruin his child’s adult life with bad upbringing. This is not something specifically about religion though.
It could be the way I was raised, but I had, at no time being raised as a catholic going to a private school, found any conflict between the Bible and Science. The only actual conflict I ever had as a kid came from the possibility of Aliens? But Evolution? Nope.
The reason for this was firmly rooted in our teachers letting us know that we didn’t know what how God worked. They didn’t know how God worked, nobody knows how God works. When it came to discussion of Genesis it basically went “Look, shit didn’t get put together in 6 of our days, it got put together in 6 of God’s day? Do you know how long a day is to God? Then STFU.”
It was basically all taught as “So God made this crazy universe. With science we figure out how it all works.” As far as evolution was concerned, it was just God’s way of building us. Its like fuck, we don’t know. So why presume what an all mighty mythical being did or didn’t do?
That distinction is really where the problem lies. You aren’t discussing whether or not Science and Faith are compatible (which they can be) so much as asking “Well, is this one particular interpretation of this religion compatible with science?” Which it damn well fucking isn’t. That is the main problem which people of faith are having: well funded loonies keep going around doing dumb shit as soon as the spotlight hits them.
No idea why the fuck I’m the one explaining this shit. Oh well, that anthropology swag.
That isn’t ironic in the slightest. It actually makes perfect sense. Forcing somebody to do anything because, and only because, of your beliefs/opinions is a breach of trust. Why would you do that to your children of all people?
We force children to do things for objective reasons or because of things they’ll later know are true. We warn them that they should look both ways before crossing the street or they will get in trouble with dad. While obviously dad believes that’s a good idea and loves his kids, those reasons aren’t why he’s forcing it on his kids. He’s forcing it because his four year old needs tips for survival and probably doesn’t get a second chance if he fucks up.
my nation adheres to its respective constitution. allay sayers can rot.
oh and just like people shut on feminist for not shifting on femmenazis, no. religious folk should shit on Christian folk who wave their flag proudly for not telling these fundemental queers to stop.
Was Lemaitre part of the ‘hip, progressive’ clergy? Certainly not. He was labeled a creationist nutjob and his theory lambasted a religious nonsense. And what does the landscape of astrophysics look like today? Lemaitre’s brand of ‘creationism’ is front and center.
Religion and science do not necessarily contradict, they barely overlap (for a case where they do, see Lemaitre, hahaa). And I am willing to bet that the meaning of words in foreign languages from 2000 years ago has a surprising amount of leeway. Does the bible clearly contradict anything? Is anything really clear in the bible at all except that it is a collection of loosely related anecdotes/allegories written by numerous authors? Is there some degree of consistency therein? I havent read it, but I am assuming not. You seem a bit closeminded, but then again the people with the loudest voices in these particular types of arguments usually are.
I really not even sure what creationism is. Wikipedia basically said it is anyone who believes that the universe is directed by something other than random chance. Sorry, not inclined to watch billNye Vs video
It is apparent who is making a fool of the people who believe him, and it is not Bill Nye.
This debate needs to happen again and again and again until the morons in the prairies realize that the planet has evolved beyond their infantile understanding of existence.
These intellectual vegetables are somehow, miraculously (pun intended) dragging The U.S. backwards decades at a clip. They automatically refute anything that sounds…sciency.
Except who gets to pick what’s nonsense and what’s not and how are you going to enforce that? I’m sorry as much as it sucks for you, it’s their kids they should be able to teach them their values.
Nonsense would be anything that defies quantifiable evidence or values that verifiable endanger society.
Some people value crime and violence. They should find legal ramifications for teaching those values to their kids. Some people drive around with “My carbon footprint is bigger than yours” bumper stickers, too. These sloped forehead fucktards shouldn’t be teaching their kids anything.