Science censored to please Creationists?

I think there is a powerful weapon in controversy, and I wonder if anyone is utilizing it. Other than drawing attention to something through outrage (Janet Jackson, anyone) what about discrediting from the inside? Rather than tear your opponent apart, what if you join his ranks, and babble like a lunatic to scare off popular support?

Did you ever see the Southpark episode with the KKK and changing the state flag? I wonder if anything like that happens.
 
Didn't the station that showed janet jacksons breasts get fined millions?

When I was in Cleveland a network was actually scared of showing Saving Private Ryan incase they got fined in a similar way.

So I disagree that censorship is always a good thing...

I must say though, the UK had a right laugh at America's reaction to janet jacksons breasts. Over here we got 'anal bleaching' put on one of the national TV channels and nobody complained. Then there was a graphic autopsy series including an episode were they cut out a corpses sex organs and put them on display.

I'd love to see America's reaction to that lol. For a nation that lets the KKK rally because of 'freedom of speech' it doesn't extend as far as teaching science which contradicts the bible or anything against religious beliefs. At least where I live we are allowed to make fun of religion, THATS freedom of speech.
 
"You're a stubborn bastard."

I'm not stubborn when compared to my wife but I'm pretty fucking stubborn.

"people are entitled to believe what they want to believe and to raise their children in any manner they see fit."

Of course they do. They don't have a right to have schools impose their religious views though.

"doesn't mean that you, in a democracy, have the right to put your views over another if you are in the minority."

The majority doesn't have the right to impose their religious views (Creationism) on the minority.

Going by your "logic" science can't be taught in a Democracy. In your view scientific truth isn't based on science it's based on majority opinion.

"If the population of a state choose not to teach the 'truth' about science then that means that it won't be taught."

You're saying science can't be taught in a Democracy. Only the majority opinion can. You're also saying that the majority can impose it's religious views (Creationism) on the minority which isn't true in this country.

"If the majority of the population choose not to be taught science and the minority imposes its will to teach science on the majority then it is no longer a democracy. It has become authoritarian."

If the majority impose religious indoctrination (teaching of creationism) on the minority it has become authoritarian.

"It doesn't matter what is true. It doesn't matter what is scientifically proven."

Once again: you're saying that science can't be taught in a Democracy. In science what is scientifically proven matters.
 
Last edited:
the south sucks, and those creationists need to be whacked over the head with skillets. their beliefs are bullcrap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top