Too often religion is used as some kind of podium to try and push morality and values onto people. I'd love to see things shift again to the point that religion is used as something that is spiritual. There's nothing wrong if you feel something from being part of a religion, but once you feel the need to start pushing it into everyone else's lives, and twisting people at early ages, then you've lost the meaning of participating in a religion.

There has to be choice, you can offer rules to live by, but you should also question those rules and the reasoning and context behind them. There's too much blind devotion and not enough thinking.

I'd like to see arbitray morality give way to universal ethics. there should be rational and logical arguments and reasons for rules. If you ask any of the main people who object to homosexuality why it's wrong, the only reason they can really ever come up with is that it "says so in the Bible".

So, God loves us, but no matter how good of a person I am and no matter how blamelessly I may live my life, if I have sex with guys, or if I don't "believe" in Him they way the church thinks I should, even though there's no rational argument as to why I should believe such blatant fantasies, this same loving God will send me to an eternal (not merely equal to my time here), ultimate, pain-filled and horrific firey hell.

Yeah, that's reasonable...

i'm not american so my view may be somehow skew... but in many ways i see your country with diferent set of lens: one a country founded by religious persons that actually flee from another country that consider their interpretation of the bible to severe... and in that can be seen even today... you're country christians can be more popist that the pope if you understand me you know that present day catholic cathecism says that the bible is not a book of science... the other set of lens a country formed in values of personal freedom and conquest... anyway... religion will be here... an its so sad to think that once again a major outbreak will be caused by the clash of the cross and the crescent...

The people of this country are nuts, it's true! LOL

I guess when it finally gets so bad that people can no longer live here and need to escape America because we've become worse than any Communist (which are actually Fascist) countries that people once came here to get away from, then maybe "The People" will wake up from their Holier-than-everybody-else delusions and rediscover what liberty is supposed to be about.

If we really could become a secular nation, I think we'd be a LOT better off. And so would the "cresent" guys!!

I'm a Christian and have a very strong faith, but I have to agree with a lot of what you said. I love in Colorado. Home of Focus on the Family, New Life Church and the Religious Right. I hate how some Christians feel that they can impose their beliefs on other people. Of course, it works that way with non-Christians as well. But it does seem to me that some Christians do it more and more harshly. My sister-in-law is an example. She believes in the Creation as it is written in the Bible. I believe the Creation was written as more of a story than fact. She actually gave me a book called 'The Evolution of a Creationist". I recommend it if you want a good laugh. I call myself a "Creative Evolutionist". I believe in evolution, but I believe that God had a hand in it.
Yes, I'm a furry. Yes, I have gay friends. Yes, I have friends who are Wiccans. One of which is a Wiccan priest. And yes, I am a Christian too.

Hhmmm i love this example...
Tell your sister she has not read the whole story of Genisis,

There is a book of ancient Hebrew origin (old testement is mostly Hebrew before the Gentiles ever learned of it) it is called the Berashith.
It is derived directely from the 'code' Moses used to write the first five books of the old testement; it is the first three letters of the Hebrew bible 'b' 'r' and 'sh'. Hence 'berashith'.
It is 'how' God made the world.

In the english transliteration, (not a true translation of the three letters but an abridged one) brsh means "in the beginning". it is about seventeen chapters or so and reads like a science journal written for layman about the sceintific formation of our world over a vast (billions of years) amount of time.

It is hilarious to me that Christians are actually right, but they don't 'know it'. Mostly because if it is not written plainly for everybody to see (ie scripture) it is not to be taken as gospel.
Hebrew is designed into a thirty character numerical/alphabet that holds eight different meanings that are simular in a sense to each other per letter/number.
And, there are eight different meanings per letter in pairs and adjacent to the next or previous letter. Some letters are used instead of others in an incorrect sequence (grammar) on purpose because the meaning is more important than grammatical structure being correct.

If a computer would be able to be coded in such a way to instead of using only a binominal system but instead coded to thirty instead of only two (switches ie on and off) the bible could be more easily understood by everyone. The code for you and i to communicate to the computer would be octo-code instead of hex-code.

Maybe i should write a popular tv show so that this knowledge becomes commonplace, and then young people that grow up watching it will want to figure out technology so that the tv show sceince becomes reality. - just like 'Star Trek' sceince.

Then we could vote for a Gay Christian Republican to take the White House in a landslide and amend the constitution to make all 'furry artists' a mandatory occupation before you can run for office

Thanks for writing in and not condemning me as an atheistic asshole. I honestly don't have a problem with people believing in spiritual things...my problem is merely with religion as an institution that is forced on people who cannot do anything about it. It's hard to break away from things you grew up being told were absolute truth with a capitol T. It was hard for me, and my family and environment were only moderately religious. And, as I have said before--I don't KNOW that some sort of "god" didn't have a hand in the mechanics of how the universe was formed and where we came from. But I don't believe in the "God" of the Bible. That's all.

*hugs* Thanks.

I don't have a problem with that anymore than I have a problem with people who do believe in every word of the Bible. What I have a problem with is people who use the Bible to rationalize the way the live and the decisions they make. "Oh gay people are bad cause the Bible says so" or "Tattoos are bad cause the Bible says so". Anyone can interpret the Bible anyway they want to find an excuse for their behavior good or bad.
I bet you didn't expect a Christian to talk like that. And as I said before, I have a strong faith and talk to God every day. As long as you don't force me to believe the way you do, I won't force you to believe the way I do. Tolerance is key!

I wish more Christians WERE like you. I know for the most part people of Faith aren't bad or evil or anything. My Grandparents were like that--good people who just wanted to be able to worship their own way and have fellowship with their friends in the church, and that's fine.

It's the organizations that screw it all up. As long as religious people don't interfere with my rights as a human being I am cool with them. But there are just too many holier-than-thou zealots in this world who want to force everyone else to follow theirs dictates. Extremeists in any faith are dangerous and scary!

i went to a catholic elementary and a catholic high school and was raised believing the same things, but then i found the internet. it saved me!

The Internet has set me free! Praise Al Gore!!

hurray!

To be honest, while I don't believe catholicism, or any religion for that matter, I did until sometime around high school, and I went to a Catholic grade school and Jesuit High School. Of course we had daily prayers and other religion-based activities (some of which were pretty stupid in retrospect), but I never felt pressured to believe in god or anything, and I actually think that the schools I went to prepared me well to make my own decisions about my beliefs when I was old enough. And I think it also had to do with my parents, who raised me Catholic but eventually stepped back and let me find my own spiritual path.

In short: it's not just the teachings. It's the people who receive them and the people who put them in context for you.

First of all, the religious schools only have control over the child until they are a grown adult. Trust me, PLENTY of kids who grow up in religious schools wind-up leaving their "faith" altogether when they become emancipated. The reason they're in the school in the first place is that their parents put them there. Also, not every religious school teaches crap like Intelligent Design or skips Evolution at all.

Another thing you can take solace in is that children who attend religious schools typically do not proceed on to schools of higher learning and become white collar professionals. If they do, it's typically on to another religious college or university like Bob Jones where they become theologians, church accountants or some other type of professional "church tool". Kinda dead-end jobs and education, heh.

Keep in mind also that while there may be HUNDREDS of religious schools in the metro area, they have VERY small attendance, usually no more than 30 or 40 students. The only exception might be larger Catholic schools, which aren't really so bad about dogma and indoctrination.

That is good to know--I feel some small solace in what you say.

I just know that even though I didn't go to a "Christian" school, I WAS in the Bible-belt of Texas and between school and church it was later very difficult for me to shake off my Cultish indoctrination as a Lutheran. If my Grandparents had been Baptists, I might never have been able to!

Yeah, that's actually a very interesting topic. Philip Pullman, author of the "His Dark Materials" trilogy (the first book of which was recently made into the film "The Golden Compass") is a self-described atheist and "Secular Humanist" like myself, but he was born and raised with the indoctrination of the English Episcopalian (Anglican) church during his formative and young adult years... He believes that no matter what, you can't simply "remove" or escape those things, and they'll always be with you and in your mind, even if you don't believe in them or support them. And I hafta say that in my own case I find it pretty true.

Even now, in my early 40s, it's difficult for me to say out loud that I don't believe in Christianity and God. I get a nervous feeling in my gut, knowing how many people around me and in my own family would disapprove...it's like being gay!

Phil uses Christian mythology the way I think it should be used...the way Greek mythology and Norse mythology is used--as a plot device! ^0^

The Japanese use it that way too, in many animes and manga. Angel Santuary jumps to mind.

If it makes you feel any better, kids who are taught in a religious private school are much more likely to go agnostic/atheist/non-christain the moment they hit the Real World. Usually collage, though that's why we have Christian collages these days. Regardless, this is something the church fathers of various stripes have been writing many a long worried paper about. They're raising them in a christian-only world, so why is it they break out of it the moment they encounter the rest of us?

Point being, all they're doing is hurting themselves with this.

Very true. In sixth grade my parents started sending me to a Lutheran school where I stayed all the way through high school. I went pagan during that time.

I completely agree deathpup, I've been in a catholic school, it was completely ridiculous. However I did meet some pretty interesting teacher's there. Ones that actually gave a shit about me. They did a fair enough job of keeping god out of the classroom actually. My science class was just like any of the others that I had; except, get this... He actually corrected the students that felt the urge to go on one of those "the bible says..." tangents. Stood directly in front of a class of little brainwashed catholics and said "the bible is more of a set of morals, and fables put down to help us reach an understanding on how to live without hurting others... Unfortunately too many, take it literally in ignorance."

Have faith, not in god; but the fact that they "the teachers" actually have the sense to see what is documented truth and what is a story to carry out a message.

But yes it is very disconcerting that they can force their beliefs on almost anyone up until the child is 18, which happen to be the years that they develop the most and therefore can do the most damage.

Another thing that bothers me about Christians is that they think the the Bible invented morality. It DID put things in writing that may not have been expressed that way before, but like it's stories, ethics and morals had been evolving for centuries or millenia before that.

It's good to hear that religious schools can be more progressive than I feard they universally were.

I can't agree with that!!! People were ignorant savages before christianity, we saved them from their own plight, we taught them the very values that they exist upon now!!! </sarcasm>

I've known those people, and by god did I actually knock a few of them out lol.
they are some of the most backassed people imaginable, and I found after trying to talk with them for hours, the true meaning of zealot. They are unwavering in their belief even though it is wrong, they cannot be swayed by proof, intelligence, opinions, or violence. That is what pisses me off more than anything, is that they can seriously LOOK and LISTEN to documented evidence that proves otherwise and they immediately dismiss it as a ploy. Thankfully none of them ever tried "it's the devil's work" or I'd have probably killed them on the spot before they can do anymore damage to anyone else and ironically the religion they are defending like an ass. Good to hear from you man, keep it up; I love coming and reading the actual philosophical debates that I can only find in people like you and Kamilya's Journals. Unfortunately she deletes a lot of her journals and I'm sure some great discussion's were lost.

Keep it up man, I'm eagerly awaiting the next one.

Dont worry...i went to a "Christian" School for 7 years. I turned out ok.

Of course, when the schools emit crazed unevolved wingnut bible-gnashing fundies then they think they turned out okay too.

Um. That parses a bit ambiguously, and could be taken as nasty. It's not meant to be, promise. (Unless you're crazed and unevolved, which I doubt. *wag*)

I meant ok in the Deathpuppy version of it.

I would not have thought otherwise. :)

*hugs da bear*

I'm not anti religion freedom is a two way street freedom also means responsibility. Catholics here i think learn a mix Its fundamentalists period that scare me that includes science fundys. too I am very much into science but faith is as much apart of the human condition as logic. I get just as pissed when someone tries to ram their " facts down my throat and tell me believing in life after death is stupid." I also get pissed off when somone rams their facts that if im not baptized or do this and do that ill go to hell. Yanno both sides in this long standing debate can be totally wrong.. So really I sit on the fence i guess son this one taking my time to bitch at extremists on any side I like to see a balance between exploring the spiritual and why we believe and how we believe in something. And to learning how things work why they work and how they come to be .

A lot of our do not steal do not kill others do not lie blah blah Be good to your fellow man. came from religions. and thats a fact..

I'm not upset that people have deeply held religious or spiritual beliefs--only that by indoctrinating children in those beliefs before they can make rational choices for themselves, that choice is made all the more difficult for them.

I don't even deny that there may be an overall spiritual conciousness behind the workings of the cosmos...i'd like to think that there is, but I definitely do NOT believe in the divisive and arbitrary dictates of organized Christianity or Islam or Judeaism (however that's spelled...)

They are based on the writings of unknown and primatively supersticious persons thousands and/or hundreds of years ago. People who were themselves indoctrinated by the societies of their times--most of which WERE religious theocracies of one sort or another.

People need to be able to make a rational choice about spiritual beliefs. Children can't.

I find it most useful, though chilling, to regard this as a wholly amoral war between mutually exclusive memes.* It helps me bear in mind that, though 'our' meme is the more powerful in terms of coherence, richness and explanatory power, 'theirs' has disturbing powers of its own. It requires less intellectual rigour and effort, it has powerful features to keep its vector from questioning and rejecting it, and it has a direct tap to basic human psychological needs. We are much righter than they are, but being right isn't a decisive advantage to a meme, any more than intelligence isn't necessarily a decisive advantage to an organism.

I was going somewhere with this, but now I'm too tired to remember where. G'night!

* Mutually exclusive in their extreme versions, anyway.

Christian schools tend to have more snow days because they draw children from a wider area than public schools, often also out in the country-side, where the roads aren't cleared as regularly.

"They don't have to learn about safe sex..." Sure they do. 'Don't have sex before marriage", the ultimate safe sex practice

I know, so scary, right? So many religious schools in so many areas.....

Its simply more comforting to the majority to believe in a god, and to devote their life to said god. Of course, in their own way (Praying only for sports and christmas presents)

It is a truly frightening thought to me that there might be no god, and I can see why so many take comfort in the fact, but no one will overcome that fear if they dont face it. Facing reality is the answer, and more and more people face it every day.

I think the biggest problem here is that whatever percentage of children grow up believing whatever religion was forced upon them can STILL vote.

You know, I would be the first to say someone's background and beliefs should never disqualify them from such a right, but when someone genuinely believes that holding your hands together and talking to yourself is more effective than penicillin for healing wounds (or more effective than doing ANYTHING to actually try to solve a problem), then I have to draw a line. Last I checked, talking to yourself was a sign of dementia. Believing that your invisible friend is listening to you and talking back is a sign that you need MEDICATION.

Another commenter touched upon something I'd like to reiterate. A person should never be prevented from having spiritual beliefs. And I believe that as well. But the rest of us need real solutions to real problems and that requires rational people and rational thought. A religious person should never, ever run for a major political office (governor or above) nor should they vote. If the religious people want to huddle together and pray for a solution, then by all means do so! I encourage it. However, us rational folk need real answers. My President should be sending a cleanup crew when an oil tanker wrecks, NOT calling together a sermon and PRAYING that the oil will magically vanish and not damage the ocean.

YEa I went to a Christian private school.. adn then into Therapy LOL
Yea I agree that the problem is that Religion is an "All or Nothing" thing. it doesnt teach "You are Christian.. tolerate the other religions."
it sees other religions as EVIL.. and it thinks that the government should ALLOW them to do what they want.. Like Pray in schools.. Post Christmas Manger scenes..
Personally I have no problem with "Thought for they" stuff in schools , A moment of silence, and yes Post the manger scene next to Santa Claus but thats me..

The "public" (run at government gunpoint) schools teach their own BS - that hurricanes and pandemics are caused by SUVs. Those kids will never hear that the Martian polar ice caps are rapidly receding and that there is global warming on Pluto, Neptune, Triton, Titian, etc.... False explanations are dangerous whether religious or secular. Currently, I consider the "anthropogenic carbon dioxide is causing dangerous global warming" scam to be far more dangerous than the anthropocentric idea that some god punishes us with hurricanes and plagues.

Speaking of Pluto and stupid science snafu's, have they decided if it's a planet or not yet? I mean freaking, they'd been teaching students for years that it was a planet, then some-odd months ago said they might reclassify it as a asteroid, and I never heard anything of a final decision (probably because I was rolling my eyes pretty hard and wasn't all that interested in hearing it back then).

Pluto is not a planet, by two falls and a knockdown. It is the same chunk of rock that it ever was. It's hardly a snafu. It's just that people finally got down to deciding what really defines a planet.

Of course, if one of the many holy books in one of the many "one true" religions had said it was a planet, nobody could decide otherwise, think about reclassifying it or ever question why it is a planet without being heretical. And that's the difference between science and religion, in a nutshell.

Stay tuned to find out whether they decide whether viruses are alive.

It's a snafu when its taught for years then changed. And really, yes, it is the same chunk of rock it always was.

As for viruses, "obligate intracellular parasite". Not alive. When I graduated in 2002, as far as my science teachers had ever heard the debate was long since settled. However, the debate I keep hearing is "is it a plant or animal?" My vote: give them their own kingdom.

I don't remember much about school. That was a long time ago, for me. I do remember that what we were taught about science was "not a hell of a lot." In elementary school, the science teacher insisted in leading us in a prayer at the start of each class, even though it was a public school. The one thing I did learn, which trumped all the others, was the scientific method, so I recognized that everything I learned needed independent verification. These days, education is so politicized, schools are leery even of teaching something as basic as that evolution is a fact.

In 2002 the debate about viruses may have been long settled, but when I was in school, they were equivalent to bacteria. What an education snafu! Cope. Knowledge changes. The viruses are the same -- only the definition of life has been refined. For kids graduating In 2032, the debate over Pluto will be "long settled"

You can't give viruses a kingdom if they aren't even alive. That would be like adding a kingdom for long-chain polymers.

The arrogant academics decided to demote Pluto. I consider that to be a decision that speaks volumes about their perceived self-importance. As far as I'm concerned, Pluto is big enough to be a planet so it is a planet, regardless of the unusual degree of elipticity of it's orbit. My standards are objective: if an object is massive enough for gravity to pull it into a spheroid and if it isn't orbiting a planet (which would make it a moon), then it is a planet. That creates a real distinction between potato shaped asteroids and planets, and makes Pluto one of the latter.

Your standards are certainly one way of defining a planet, but objective they are not, because you are biasing them improperly to include Pluto for sentimental reasons, and lack information about how celestial bodies are constituted. The problem with Pluto is, what about all the dozens of other bodies out there in the scattered disk which were discovered after Pluto, which happen to be just as large? Are they all planets? Eris is more massive than Pluto and even has a moon. Is it a planet? Arrogance is giving Pluto special place just because it was discovered a long time ago. What about Ceres? Why isn't it the fourth planet instead of Mars? It has enough gravity to pull it into a spheroid, and even has lakes. They had to draw the line somewhere -- Objectively -- which is what they did, in August 2006, when they labeled Pluto a "Dwarf Planet." I'm pretty sure the astronomers know exactly how important their labeling of Pluto is, which is why I'm sure they are mystified that anybody gave a rat's ass what label they stuck on it.

On the contrary, whether gravitation contracts a body into a spheroid is entirely objective and is observable to anyone who cares to look. The definition of "dwarf" versus not "dwarf" is an arbitrary human preference, and is not based on a fundamental physical mechanism, unlike gravitationally driven spheroidalization.

Ceres is in the asteroid belt, outside - not inside - of Mar's orbit, and would be considered the fifth - not fourth - planet by this definition.

Eris would also be a planet by this definition, and there are undoubtedly other Kuiper belt and Oort cloud objects yet to be discovered that would qualify. The foolishness of the present policy may become painfully apparent when an object larger than Mercury is discovered way out there. Will it be called a planet, or will Mercury be demoted to a dwarf? Discriminating on the basis of a certain number of miles in diameter is arbitrary and capricious, whereas gravitational spheroidalization is a fundamental physical phenomenon.

Yeah, I was always hoping that the number of official planets in the Solar System would grow as we discovered more objects in the Kuiper Belt. Still...I kind of like the term Dwarf Planet--maybe they should just consider that Little Planets are planets too!

What a collection of loaded words. "Discrimination...foolishness...painfully...demoted." Gravity contracting a body to a sphere IS arbitrary, because it depends on composition. If Ceres were rock instead of mud, it would be a potato, like Vesta, which is the same order of magnitude, mass-wise (and is classified as an asteroid hmm, maybe because it's not round?). Astronomers aren't big on political correctness. But I suppose to appease those who are worried the planets might have hurt feelings, we could call Pluto a "Diametrically Challenged" Planet, and Jupiter could be a "Striving Brown Dwarf Star" instead of being dismissed as a mere gas giant. Oh, hell, there's that accursed "Dwarf" label again. Discrimination! Maybe call it a Mass-challenged Runner-up Star.

Hey, if the classification system is inadequate to encompass the observations, it will be modified again. That sort of thing has happened repeatedly in the periodic table. Huge changes have had to be made in the categorization of animal species since DNA analysis has become available. That's how science works. Did you really think all the science humanity would ever do would be finished before you were born?

Decisions of this sort are made by the political process of voting, whether in the IAU or the IPPC, and hence are inherently political in nature. The fact that it is scientists voting does not change the nature of the process.

My parents, and most of their friends went to Catholic school. If they are religious, none of them has revealed it, although an uncle of mine recently did earn the blessing to be a missionary.

Last night I had an opportunity to go through some boxes that my father (the packrat) had kept, containing some old schoolwork that his mother (also packrat) had kept. He spent about a half hour grumbling about how anal those old nuns were about assignments while he looked over them and ripped them up in preperation for shredding.

My point is that these indoctrinating schools don't necessarily convince the kids about the nature of god and the world. Although there is certainly still the danger of brainwashing impressionable youth, I don't think it's much of a threat.

I was raised a hardcore Christian, but when I heard my preacher talk against gays, that's when I started denouncing my religion and moving towards being agnostic.

Usually, fanatics spawn aethiests, so...yeah, that's their own doing.

I went through a Catholic school from 8th to 12th grade, only because it was pretty much the only option for a decent education in these parts. I seemed to be an even bigger bully magnet than usual, and after going through 7th grade in a place that kind of reminded me of Dangerous Minds/High School High, I came to the unfortunate conclusion that Jesus-flavored education was the only kind of education I was likely to survive. Well, it wasn't that unfortunate at the time, since I happened to be religious anyway.

Fortunately, I'm one of the people  jurann mentioned who grows to resent the dogmatic religious school so much that they become rebel atheists, and now I'm pretty much with you on how much the religious right scares me. And oh, the stories I could tell. Like this lady they brought in to speak for us in 11th or 12th grade who claimed the Virgin Mary spoke to her and told her all these hidden clues in the traditional Our Lady of Guadalupe image ("Her one shoe, from this angle, looks like a fetus' head--Mary foresaw the rise of abortion thousands of years before it happened, and has been warning us against it this whole time....")

ide post something but have probably already said it to you at some point.

Once again, I like the way you think ^-^

I went to a Catholic school(we're not Catholic, but it was the only Christian school in the area) for Kindergarten and part of 1st grade, and became an atheist over a period of maybe 7 years after high school. The fact that my mom's a preacher may have made me tired of Christianity.
Quite the opposite from your entry, I get tired of people complaining about the secular nature of public schools, so I gladly recommend Christian schools to those people. In public school, children don't have a choice in what they're taught either, it's just up to the parents to mold their children into what they consider outstanding individuals... and eventually find out that they did it wrong.

Yeah, just think how much easier it might have been to shake off those Christian chains if you hadn't grown up with it being pounded into you. It took me longer than seven years to make a complete break, although it was actually in High School when I began to question it all.

I guess being an ex-Christian is like being an ex-smoker. Once you have escaped it, you just don't like the smell of smoke around you anymore. ^0^

I actually attended a catholic high school, and actually we learned about both safe sex and evolution, while the public high schools in this very republican area aren't really allowed to teach such things.

And actually, I really believe my school turned more people agnostic than catholic. Although, we did discuss issues like gay rights and we got to hear both sides. I was surprised at that.

Religion isn't the enemy. Close-mindedness is. Religion frequently adds to close mindedness, but I think just as often not so. I at least used to be catholic, so I have great respect for everyone's religions, though I try to convince them not to let their beliefs limit my life.

Now THAT's some irony for you. But keep in mind, the reason that the public schools have such problems are the religious community leaders trying to inflict their close-minded ideals on everybody else.

It should be the other way around, you're right. Public schools should be liberal. Like I said--I don't have a problem with spiritual or religious people; my problem is with the organizations that impose doctrine over reason on people outside their faith.

i jsut have to say this. i went to a baptist school. they do teach science. and all of that. obviously they teach the theory of evolution as jsut that a theory. and they didnt give it any less merrit than they did creationism.


and besides. everyone has the right to there beliefs. and if we can tell a christian parrent they cant teach there children by there morals. that means they can tell us we cant teach our children by ours

And there you touch on the very reason that nothing can really be done about it. Of course we can't dictate to people what to teach their kids, at least not in private schools.

Also, I am glad to know that some religious schools at least teach the theoretical idea of evolution. It definitely shouldn't have less merrit than creationism, because evolution fits the facts and evidence we have so far been able to unearth (sorry, I can never resist a pun).

Creationism, on the other hand, is merely a mythological story with absolutely no scientific evidence to back it up--so it can't even really be called a theory. This is my problem with teaching about it in a science class--not just that I don't personally believe in it.

Anyway, you are right--the state has no business interferring in religious schools. I was merely commenting on my worry that there are so many of them.

well personally. when i was younger, i believed in evolution with the guiding help of god. ofcourse now that i read the bible i have stopped believeing in god. but thats jsut me >.< the vast majority of religous people i know do believe in scientific proof. its jsut the wackjobs that take the bible literally that believe darwin is in hell with hitler and and black people. ofcourse maybe its just different here in california. maybe the rest of the worl d really is that fucked up.