RHF wrote:

RO,
.
You have a limited vision about "The Role"
of the Public Schools in American Society.
+ The Three "R"s Reading, wRiting and aRithmetic )
+ The Sciences and Our Natural Surroundings.
+ Facts about the World Around Us.
[Religion is a "Very Real" Fact in the World Around Us]
+ History of Our Nation and the World.
[Religion is a "Vital Part" of the History of Our Nation
and the World.]
+ Traditions of Our Nation and Society.
[Religion is an "Integral Facet" of Our Nation and Society.]
.
Supported and Guided by a Locally Elected Public School Board
that Reflects and Represents the Values of the Community.
.
the wholly secular public school is a myth of the liberals ~ RHF
.
.
Teaching comparative religion = okay in a class devoted to philosophical and
religious issues. Also in history and social studies classes. Not okay to
teach non-science in a science class. Evolution belongs in science class,
religion does not.

Can't say I understand why you've introduced the term "liberal" here.
Secularism is a general trend in western countries, including those who are
socially and politically conservative and liberal.

On 24/03/2005 5:28 PM, bpnjensen wrote:
+ Facts about the World Around Us.

[Religion is a "Very Real" Fact in the World Around Us]

Religion is real, but as a "fact" it is a human construct. Yes, there
are religions - many, all of whom have equal claims to the notion that
theirs is the correct one - but they are all human constructs.
Mythology exists as a part of human sociology, but that does not make
its content factual.

There may be a place for religion in school - if so, it is in the
social studies area, where human charateristics are examined. It is
certainly not in science class. Religion cannot, by its nature, be a
science; it is not even a theory by any accepted definition. In all
its forms, religion is a cultural phenomenon.

This has nothing to do with whether or not God exists or has
omnipotence over the universe. That is purely a matter of faith, and
is up to the individual. It has to do with whether schools are
suitable for passing on cultural or mythological beliefs as fact, which
they are not. That is what shortwave radio is for ;-)

Well said.

To extend your last paragraph, it should be noted that science is not
contrary to faith, and is not about "disproving" religious ideas.
Science and faith are, by definition, completely separate paradigms that
have little to inform the other. The mere existence of science does not
minimize the importance of faith, and vice-versa. However, ideas like
"intelligent design" attempt to explain notions based on faith using the
parts of science that fit, and throwing away the parts that don't.

Science cannot be used to prove or disprove the existence of a divine
creator. If god or gods have created the universe, space and time, and
all the natural phenomena that people have observed in a scientific way
over the centuries, there would be no way for science to factually
determine this.

However, this was never the aim of science, so it should not be expected
to do so.

Theories about the nature of the universe are constantly revised as we
learn more provable (or disprovable) facts. This does not change
observed phenomena at all.

To make a more apropos comment with respect to this newsgroup, we do not
understand, in some fundamental ways, how radio waves and electricity
function. We have many theories about the fundamental nature of how
radio waves propagate and electricity turns RF into sound, and we've
developed a huge body of evidence that has well-understood technical
applications (i.e., a shortwave radio.) However, if one examines the
theories of electromagnetic physics there are still questions regarding
how it works at some fundamental level. Theories still abound on how,
exactly, these things we call electrons (the nature of which is still
being discussed) "move" (or don't move) through a conductor.

However, even if these theories change, or are revised, or contested
over the years, this does not change the fact that our radios still work
the same way we expect them to. We've learned a lot about radio and
electronics in the last century. This does not change a whit how well
your crystal radio set works.

The notion that radio, or even evolution, is somehow "just" a theory is
not the point. Theories are frameworks upon which we hang observed
behaviour in order to better understand it. Even if the theories are
revised to take into account new observed behaviour that contradicts
some aspect of the theory, the worlds still works in the same (poorly
understood or not) way.

This, in fact, is the great strength of rational though, of which
science is the best example.

Thanks for listening.

-- clvrmnky