BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Intelligent Design, Creationism, And Rightwing Social Memes

 
  

Page: 12(3)4

 
 
robertrosen
18:06 / 07.10.05
Money,where we find most of our problems with the military action of our government versus loving our enemies is that God's law of justice for the taking of a life demands that life be taken; yet, God's spiritual law of mercy and forgiveness grants that a murderer can be forgiven and restored. How can we reconcile this? We must understand that God instituted civil authorities to maintain order in the earth. God uses them to restrain evil and they should be obeyed for this purpose. In the New Testament we see that even Jesus surrendered to the governing authorities because He was submitted to God.

John 19:11: "Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above..."

Romans 13:1-5 (RSV):
1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.
2 Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval,
4 For he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.

From these verses we see that governments can elect to bear the sword (go to war) to deal with evil men. Although the act of war is a harsh form of punishment upon evil invaders, the alternative is far worse -- the destruction of innocent people by wicked aggressors.
 
 
robertrosen
18:35 / 07.10.05
Sentimentity, I believe that all major religions need to be represented. This includes Christians, Muslims, Jews etc., yes. I am not familiar enough with Scientology to respond at this time. If Scientology could pass an agreed upon impact test, yes!

I don’t want schools to become religious institutions! I want them to teach the positive and negative effects of religion on society. I want them to teach the basics of faith and show the similarities across many different religions. I do not want them to favor any one God or religion. I believe in our teachers and in our public schools and although Creationism is obviously a problem as presently presented, I believe we can find an approach that will be able to link science, history, economics, etc. to religion. They are obviously connected throughout time. To exclude one from the formula, I believe, is a big mistake.

Kids will always find sex and aliens more attractive. Watching TV and going to the movies already over influences their lives today. This cannot make it any worse, only better.

Conservative Christians are wrong about many things, I know, I am one of them. I care not what hey think related to this issue. I want as much of this presented as possible. Obviously the curriculum would have to be tailored to class level etc. as we do already with other material.

Fighting the lawyers and lawsuits all the way to the Supreme Court would be a necessity. I believe the Father is already positioning the court for that battle. Don’t go nuclear on me for that comment please. I couldn’t resist.

If we can teach students in second grade how Eskimos and Indians and Anastasia lived, why not the effects of religion on life in America or in Muslim nations. Why not teach the impact of communism on religion in Russia or China?
 
 
Mr Tricks
19:02 / 07.10.05
American schools have enough trouble teaching how "our" founding fathers engineered the clearing this continent of its original inhabitants; much less the circumstances of its discovery. I doubt they'll do much better with the religion studies stuff.

Meanwhile you have yet to answer any of the questions directed at you ROBERTROSEN and continue to litter this tread with inconsequential ramblings about God and your "father" BUSH.

There's already a thread available to unpack the greater picture of Religion & Society. Somehow I'm not surprised your semi-trolling is not, as yet, present there.
 
 
robertrosen
19:30 / 07.10.05
Money, some of the less critical curriculum that I believe could take a back seat: Recreation, Health Care, Sex Education, Driver Education, Art, Music just to name a few! I am not saying that these are unimportant. I am saying that the challenge we face today requires us to adjust to survive.
Excuse my ignorance, but of which American Project are you speaking?
 
 
Jack Fear
19:39 / 07.10.05
Say, I've got an idea: they can teach Driver's Ed and Art at Sunday school and the local churches!

I mean, since the public schools will be doing their jobs for them, they'll have plenty of free time and resources.
 
 
Jack Fear
19:43 / 07.10.05
The "American project," BTW, is the United States itself.
 
 
robertrosen
19:44 / 07.10.05
Mr. Tricks, I have been attempting to answer questions, obviously not to your satisfaction. Sorry if I offended you! I believe these issues are closely connected.

I believe Bush is an ignorant man influenced by many others!!!!!!!! He is a man being dishonest with Americans.

Let me ask you this question sir. If God came to earth and you then believed He existed, would you then change your tune on what was taught and where it was taught in our public schools today?
 
 
robertrosen
19:48 / 07.10.05
Jack, I have been to many places of religious worship and none teach what I am proposing.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
20:07 / 07.10.05
A world in which children are taught Intelligent Design RATHER THAN SEX EDUCATION would, I'll concede, definitely be a world in need of a Saviour. ANY Saviour that was handy.
 
 
Mr Tricks
20:32 / 07.10.05
I don't need GOD to literally come to earth to be certain of my spiritual salvation; and NO it would not change my attitude about religious dogma being inserted into a secular educational system.

Trying to exclude the sex education, physical education or the art for the sake of a dubious religious presentation seems morally bankrupt. With safe,legal abortions already on the chopping block, thanks to our a nation's alpha-zealot, dropping sex education is like leaving poor people in a city that's about to be flooded . . . Check.

Our nation's the FATTEST one on the planet. It suffers a severe epidemic of obesity for children, but I suppose your view is that their health is secondary to knowing the difference between Scientology and creationism. Meanwhile you'd sacrifice the means for an individual to come closest to Divine contact (IMO) through music and art for a class in pseudo science. %Glad you didn't have a say when the Last Super or the Sistine chapel where being commissioned.%
 
 
ibis the being
22:23 / 07.10.05
Money, some of the less critical curriculum that I believe could take a back seat: Recreation, Health Care, Sex Education, Driver Education, Art, Music just to name a few! I am not saying that these are unimportant. I am saying that the challenge we face today requires us to adjust to survive.

Okay, this is an interesting proposal.

Recreation. I never took a class called Recreation in all my years of schooling. Perhaps robertrosen is referring to recess or free periods, which are typically offered to younger students (elementary level). The function of recess/free time is for younger children to blow off excess energy, get some exercise, and get a mental break (usually midday) to refresh them for the afternoon's lessons. How would religion be more useful here? Well, I suppose the students could be put into a prayer meditation... no physical exercise, and as there's no conceivable way to make sure students are praying, it would just be an enforced Quiet Time.

Health Care. The purpose of any health class would be, of course, to teach students about the nature of the human body and how best to keep fit and prevent illness and disease. In the United States, there is an effort underway to emphasize preventative care, as treating the already-diseased is very costly, raises insurance rates, is a drain on Medicare/Medicaid, and can ruin familes with no health insurance. However, I suppose people can just trust God to heal them if they fall ill. Of course, if that doesn't work, well, we're screwed.

Sex Education. I'm sure there's no winning an argument with a conservative Christian on this one, but here I go. Educating teenagers about sex is the only way to prevent sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies in those people. You can say they should wait until marriage to have sex. Fine - not even going to go there. But marriage licenses don't come with a sex ed class either. Someday those people are going to have sex, and it only takes *one* partner to have not quite saved hir virginity for the other to contract an STD. And I think it behooves all people, but perhaps particularly women who intend to bear children, to have some clue about STD symptoms and treatments... to say nothing of just understanding their own bodies.

Drivers Ed. Well, you got me there. But Drivers Ed is typically optional anyway and often not even part of the school curriculum, but offered through the DMV.

Art & Music. This I think may be too large an issue to attempt to address here. What is the relative value of arts education to a culture, as compared to religious studies?....
 
 
robertrosen
22:40 / 07.10.05
Mr. Tricks, you are obviously more intelligent than I. I know you're more educated. I am not saying this to be sarcastic. I mean what I say. My communication skills are lacking, but my intentions are good and sincere. So please, explain why health education and teaching children to wear protection during sex are more important than morality, love, forgiveness, compassion and understanding? These are the things that I believe are lacking in American society today. The Church and Family seem to be doing a piss poor job of getting this message across. Understanding the impact of faith/religion, on human behavior, throughout the history of mankind, both the good and the bad, seems to be a critical component to a successful resolution of many of the world’s problem. I have already conceded that teaching ID in a science environment is just a ploy. To me a much wider approach is necessary. Church and family have failed us. Materialism and Capitalism leave many behind. Socialism seems to destroy the enthusiasm and the desire necessary to advance and improve. Something seems to be missing in our overall education regardless of where we're taught. This might explain the corruption in Government and Business throughout the world. Maybe, just maybe, we need to add spirituality to the mix?

I understand that health education saves lives. I understand that sex education is more than protection during sex. Why isn’t religion as important? Who decided that this was the priority and it cannot change?

Most people do not realize that the First Amendment says nothing about the "separation of church and state." It simply states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

In the Constitution of the Soviet Union, however, the doctrine of the separation of Church and State is found: "In order to ensure to citizens freedom of conscience, the church in the U.S.S.R. is separated from the State, and the school from the church. Freedom of religious worship and freedom of antireligious propaganda is recognized for all citizens" (Article 124). Article twelve of the 1918 Soviet Constitution decrees that no church or religious organization "shall enjoy the rights of judicial person." Instruction of children under age 18 in religious matters, whether in public or private, is against the law.

The concept of separation of church and state in our Constitution is not there to protect Americans from religion. It is there to protect Americans from the government. But in their desire to promote their secular humanist philosophy using the power of government, many today want to alter America's heritage and remove religion from its history. Their desire is not to safeguard denominational neutrality by the state. It is to eradicate every vestige of religion from our public institutions.

I don't want Intelligent Design taught in our schools as a science. I want people to understand the benefits that come with spirituality. I want people to learn that religion serves many good and positive purposes. I want them to understand how religion has been misused and how many have died in the name of Christianity and why.
 
 
robertrosen
23:10 / 07.10.05
ibis in furs, I am talking about priorities. I am not against art, music and sex education. They are obviously important. They all play an important role in a well-rounded education. What I meant by Recreation were classes like physical education and class trips.

It's all right to discuss current events and politics, but not faith and religion. I am still amazed!

I am approaching this with a good heart and open mind.
 
 
Jack Fear
23:11 / 07.10.05
Jack, I have been to many places of religious worship and none teach what I am proposing.

Whose fault is that, then?

Seems to me it's not the public schools that need reforming—but the churches.
 
 
robertrosen
23:26 / 07.10.05
Jack, you are right about the failure of the Church. No doubt about it. I believe we need change. Teaching any important subject matter in a vacuum is a mistake. It all needs to be knitted together. Education is education. Teachers know how to get students to learn. Understanding that having to eat fish on Friday as an economics event might help bind faith-religion-economics-caring for others!
 
 
Jack Fear
23:38 / 07.10.05
Yeah, but what I'm saying is: Why should teaching that interconnectedness be the responsibility of the public schools—which, by their definition, have among their constituency adherents of every religion and those with no religion?

If the churches—which are private institutions, after all—have failed, then why should the public schools use public money to pick up their slack?

I find this a particularly odd position for a self-professed conservative to take. Conservatives tend to get all up in arms when public schools teach diversity, saying it's not the government's place to force value systems on our kids. How is this different?

Or does it all depend upon whose value system we're talking about?
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
08:29 / 08.10.05
RR, I was referring to the actions of the Courts executing criminals, not even considering paying any heed to the foreign policy and military engagement in other nations when I referred to the Ten Commandments being inscribed in the Supreme Court.

The US Supreme Court executes more convicts than the Arab states / Afghanistan ever did...Sharia Law, it seems, has nothing on the US when it comes to 'an eye for an eye, a tooth a tooth for a tooth'.

How does this sit alongside 'Thou shalt not kill?' Which takes precedence in which circumstances? And does the fact that clearly the former supercedes the latter as far as rule of law is concerned as well as military intervention in foreign states shed any new angles on the fact that many Muslims
are radicalised by literal interpretations of specific verses in the Qu'ran (which I gather you feel is an evil and dangerous precedent)?
 
 
robertrosen
15:59 / 08.10.05
Jack, I believe that diversity is tantamount to strength. I believe that teaching value systems to our kids are a long overdue necessity. Church is for worship and schools are supposed to be for education. I‘m talking about education. Remember, I do not support ID in science class!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is not about that, so excuse the fact that this discussion is happening in this thread! If you want to end this, then do not respond.

I fear that this all really rests on believing in a higher power or not. This shouldn’t be the case. This makes me sad.

It also hurts to feel the constant hostility from such educated people. All conservatives are not the same. Just as liberals have different views, so do conservatives. Conservatives also want what’s best for this country. We just have a different approach.

Talking about love, compassion, forgiveness and understanding on the one hand and then fighting wars on the other is a difficult thing for me to reconcile and rationalize, but I do. I believe that God instituted civil authorities to maintain order on the earth. God uses them to restrain evil. They should be used for this purpose. In the New Testament we see that even Jesus surrendered to the authorities because He was submitted to God.

John 19:11: "Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above..."
Romans 13:1-5 (RSV):
1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.
2 Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval,
4 For he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.

From these verses we see that governments can elect to bear the sword (go to war) to deal with evil men. Although the act of war is a harsh form of punishment upon evil invaders, the alternative is far worse -- the destruction of innocent people by wicked aggressors.

I realize that you could easily tear this apart and turn it in and around on itself. The difference in how I view these statements. I believe they are from the mouth of God. This takes precedence over logic. I know this makes no sense to you. Be gentle Jack, I’m not trying to force anything on you or anyone else. I am only telling you what is in my heart. You see, sometimes the heart can rule over the brain!!!
 
 
robertrosen
16:12 / 08.10.05
Money, I don’t support capital punishment. I don’t consider the Koran to be evil. It has many of the teachings of Christ and other excellent people. I do have many problems with certain interpretations in both the Koran and the Old Testament.

What I find outrageous are the criminals that rape young girls and boys, sometimes multiple convictions, and then are released to do again!!!!!!!!

Evil must be acted upon!!!!!!!!! You must agree that things have gone sideways?
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
12:23 / 10.10.05
What I find outrageous are the criminals that rape young girls and boys, sometimes multiple convictions, and then are released to do again!!!!!!!!

Specifically? I mean, I know what you are getting at, but this has the ring of 'Won't somebody think of the children!' tabloid hysteria about it, and I don't think failures in the judicial system can necessarliy be attributed to a lack of spirituality in the education system.

But for the Ten Commandments to be inscribed in the stonework of a Supreme Court which takes life is quite the most sickening and nausea inducing hypocrisy I have heard in a long time.
 
 
grant
13:50 / 10.10.05
It's interesting -- I agree with robertrosen that religion should be a subject in public schools. I went to a public high school for one year and a Catholic school for three, and though I loathed the Catholic school with a hearty loathing, I loved the Comparitive Religions class. Taught by an ex-nun and total Star Trek nut, got into Mormonism, Methodism, Buddhism, Hinduism, all this great stuff about what different people believe. And it wasn't at all like the Catholicism classes we also had.

So I know it's possible to teach about religion without indoctrination.

I'm also wondering, though, about something we had at the public school that seems to have sort of faded from curricula across the country. Do we have Civics classes any more? Our teacher was ancient, probably tipsy and not incredibly coherent all of the time, but the stuff in the book about the social contract and questions of the spirit of the law vs. letter of the law seem to be exactly where morality slams into the public life. I don't know why we don't spend more time on that stuff, and do it earlier. It's not in my stepson's (public) middle school classes....

-----

And a note: Scientology is already in some of the school systems. One of their daughter organizations is a textbook publisher. I'm pretty sure, despite this, that it's possible to do a class on Scientology without turning it into a recruiting session. In fact, it'd probably have the opposite effect (although you can never tell).

---

And an observation: teaching *about* religion is sort of an anthropological/cultural exercise. It doesn't really correlate with teaching (or teaching *about*) intelligent design.
 
 
grant
14:26 / 10.10.05
But for the Ten Commandments to be inscribed in the stonework of a Supreme Court which takes life is quite the most sickening and nausea inducing hypocrisy I have heard in a long time.

You should read Justice Scalia's defense of capital punishment sometime -- why he thinks the Pope is wroooong on just this one thing (when His Holiness is soooo right about the abortion thing).

The 10 Commandments on the Supreme Court, by the way, are an illustration of the kind of thing I'm talking about. They're not the only religion represented on the court. In fact, on the outside of the building, they're in the arms of Moses in a frieze on the eastern face. Moses is standing next to Confucius and Solon -- they are the allegorical "lawgivers of the East". (Note that in this context, the 10 Commandments are seen as equally belonging to Judaism, Christianity and Islam).

On the inside of the building, there's a tablet with the Roman numerals I through X, but these aren't a representation of the 10 Commandments, they're a representation of the 10 articles of the Bill of Rights. That's what the sculptor said.

Moses also shows up in another frieze of lawgivers, along with Hammurabi, Confucius, King John and Napoleon. He's again holding the commandments, but you can only see the "secular" commandments -- numbers 6 through 10 (murder, covetousness, all that jazz).

So the art in there is *about* religion, but it's not especially religious in the indoctrination sense.

You can read more about the ecumenicism of the Supreme Court building (and see pictures of the representations) over here. Follow the links at the end for even more information.
 
 
Quantum
17:50 / 10.10.05
It also hurts to feel the constant hostility from such educated people

robertrosen, I feel the responses here have been pretty measured and restrained. The hostility is toward the church infiltrating schools, not toward you. Out of interest (I'm in the UK) is there not a religious studies department in american schools? We have RE (religious education) classes here in the UK which are mandatory until 16.
Mine were ostensibly about religions all over the world but in fact were christian indoctrination and bible studies classes due to the fundamentalism of the teachers at my school. I can tell you it put me off christianity completely, so I suspect teaching christianity in schools might actually be counterproductive for children rather than promote the altruism and philanthropy you hope for.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
22:38 / 10.10.05
We must understand that God instituted civil authorities to maintain order in the earth. God uses them to restrain evil and they should be obeyed for this purpose. In the New Testament we see that even Jesus surrendered to the governing authorities because He was submitted to God.

So to clarify, this applies as much to Saddam Hussein as it does to George W. Bush, right? If not, why not?
 
 
grant
00:58 / 11.10.05
Out of interest (I'm in the UK) is there not a religious studies department in american schools? We have RE (religious education) classes here in the UK which are mandatory until 16.

No, there's no such thing in the American public school system in my experience.
 
 
robertrosen
15:57 / 11.10.05
Money $hot, it sounds like hypocrisy and it may well be hypocrisy, but consider this: The Hebrew meaning of the word translated as "kill" actually means "murder" or "to slay someone in a violent manner unjustly." So, in the Ten Commandments God is saying, "Thou shalt not murder." Unjust premeditated killing with the wrong motives of hatred, vengeance, greed, jealousy, etc. is murder. Killing in self-defense to protect oneself is not murder. The very founders of this nation were known to carry a Bible in one hand and a musket in the other in order to defend the freedom they sought here. The freedom to worship God was one of those freedoms they fought for and died for.
 
 
robertrosen
16:05 / 11.10.05
Quantum, I was born a Jew. I sent my children to a Catholic High School. One of the reasons behind this was for them to get a well-rounded education. They taught all religions of the world. My children gained a great respect for the beliefs of others. I don’t believe these classes are taught in Public Schools in the United States. I believe this can be structured in a way that can be very beneficial.
 
 
robertrosen
17:35 / 11.10.05
Petey, we permit evil that we can produce a greater good. God inflicted numerous oppressors as scourges on the Israelites, His “Chosen People”. In many cases, from an Old Testament prospective, the oppressor is merely a tool.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
18:56 / 11.10.05
George Bush is a tool? Well, you've got that right.
 
 
robertrosen
19:54 / 11.10.05
Petey, I often wonder how he became president. Amazing country of ours!
 
 
Jack Fear
21:41 / 11.10.05
So God made him President after all, huh—though not for the reason he seems to think...

That would explain a lot, wouldn't it.

But something about that notion rubs me the wrong way. It minimizes the role of free will, ignores the fact that human beings often make choices that are bad for them; it lets us off the hook, in other words—after all, it wasn't our fault he got elected; God put him there to punish us!

I call bullshit on that. I think we need to take responsibility for our own actions and acknowledge that sometimes we do stupid things like vote bastards into power (or stand by doing nothing while bastards seize power), because we're lazy or greedy or fearful. To say that the oppressor is merely God's patsy reduces the course of human events to a giant conspiracy theory.

And I'm a natural skeptic for conspiracy theories. I find it a lot easier to believe "We fucked up" rather than, "God is testing us."
 
 
Mr Tricks
23:30 / 11.10.05
robertrosen
    "Mr. Tricks, you are obviously more intelligent than I. I know you're more educated. I am not saying this to be sarcastic. I mean what I say. My communication skills are lacking, but my intentions are good and sincere. So please, explain why health education and teaching children to wear protection during sex are more important than morality, love, forgiveness, compassion and understanding?"


First, let's dispense with that top stuff, I don't need it; you don't need to say it. Now onto the question: Firstly there's no syllabus on "morality, love, forgiveness, compassion and understanding" the concept seems rather absurd. Meanwhile there is already a defined health education system which is in great need of improvement; childhood obesity is on the rise and this a problem with far reaching implications.

Secondly sex education goes beyond teaching children to use condoms (your choice of phrasing in this case is very telling and I'd suggest you take a moment to examine any assumptions underlying your choice of words). Lack of education regarding human sexuality and reproduction will more than likely lead to a rise in unplanned/unwanted pregnancies. If you get your way (and correct me if I'm wrong) there would be no option for these "children" but to carry the pregnancy full term. As a result Society on a whole will be paying for this ignorance; and by "paying for" I mean a drop in social services & quality of life for those of live on that precarious edge of poverty, we're not talking about those who can afford private schooling.

Lastly; public schooling barely achieves is mission as it is. It is severely underfunded and often one of the first items on any budgetary chopping block. Yet you would trust this same system to teach "morality, love, forgiveness, compassion and understanding." Isn't this the job of Parents, extended family and finally the local community? The meaning behind each one of those concepts exists on a broad cultural spectrum. Old Testament (eye for an eye) forgiveness is very different than what one would find in the Bhagavad Gita or the Tao Te Ching. While parallels can of course be found, there's no quantifiable measure to determine which could best be taught in a public school. Compound that with the troubles brought about when a Christen Mother finds out her child is being introduced to the concept of reincarnation.

If Parents are unable to achieve the basic feat of raising a "moral" child then perhaps they shouldn't have had children in the first place. This of course spins back to the importance of SEX EDUCATION in school.

I'll come back to the rest of your post and such later
 
 
robertrosen
23:36 / 11.10.05
Jack, no doubt, in my mind, choice plays a role, but I would venture to say that whether Kerry became president or not, God's plan is either a little closer or a little farther from fruition. God has all the time he needs.

The author of the universe, the creator of heaven and earth, according to the Bible, is the God and Father of Jesus Christ (John 1:1-18).

In the Bible Jesus taught supernatural creation. He claimed to be the author of space and time itself (the beginning and the end) and confirmed his claims by demonstrating incredible power over the creation, from turning water into wine, to walking on water and raising the dead. In the biblical worldview, time belongs to God. As such, our time, Scripture affirms, is in God’s hands. Jesus addressed this very thing when he asked, “Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life?” (Matthew 6: 27).

It is also worth noting that there is no known law of physics that purports creation of information out of nothing, and there is no known natural law through which matter can give rise to coded information.
 
 
robertrosen
00:04 / 12.10.05
Mr. Tricks, believe me when I say that all the things you mention are admirable topics for education. In fact I wish we were doing a better job of teaching them.

I do happen to believe that all life is sacred and that those born, regardless of circumstance surrounding birth, would most likely agree, relative to their life.

Try to imagine an educational system that truly valued morality, love, forgiveness, compassion and understanding? In time those children would be out in the world making critical decisions that would take all these things into consideration before acting. Idealistic, of course it is. But I believe it to be possible. I believe in the goodness of people. I believe we can accomplish anything. I have FAITH.

I get discouraged and depressed at times, but my faith lifts me up.

What did Einstein say on God and morality?

I want to know God's thoughts...the rest are details.
--Albert Einstein

When the solution is simple, God is answering.
--Albert Einstein

I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science. [He was speaking of Quantum Mechanics and the breaking down of determinism.] My religiosity consists in a humble admiratation of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality is of the highest importance -- but for us, not for God
--Albert Einstein The Human Side, 1954

Morality is of the highest importance. Who am I to question Einstein.
 
 
Scrambled Password Bogus Email
07:12 / 12.10.05
What did Nils Bohr say to Einstein?

"Einstein, stop telling God what he can and can't do!"

Albert had this habit of being a hubristic prick. You can question him all you like.

(He refused to believe in quantum mechanics...).
 
  

Page: 12(3)4

 
  
Add Your Reply