|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 3:39 pm
New Poll of high school teens across the country, makes me very happy. The poll also revealed that this year's graduating class has strong reservations about abortion. Two thirds of high school seniors would require parental consent before a woman under the age of 18 could legally obtain an abortion, and the majority of high school seniors do not believe that a woman who is poor and unable to afford another child should have a legal right to an abortion. Seventy percent of females in the class of 2006 say they would not consider abortion if they became pregnant while in high school. Yet more than 60% of high school seniors want the U.S. Supreme Court to preserve the Roe v. Wade abortion decision. (Advocate.com) It proves: 1. Most people don't fully understand Roe v. Wade. 2. That todays youth are very against abortion. The other half of the survey showed that 3/4ths of high school seniors support gay marriage or civil unions, and 63 percent support gay adoption. Full article: http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid24097.aspComments? Celebrations?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 6:07 pm
I think that's cool. Poor doesn't mean you should kill it, it's not their fault your poor or that they exist. Their not your body, just using it. Adopt is a great thing they can do, more kids need homes and family. So what if some people are gay, as long as they care for the kids then why does sexuality and being married or not matter?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 9:52 pm
It could mean a couple of other things:
-They don't think 30 years of legal precident should be sent into termoil, but rather change should be made slowly and properly, not abrupt and possibly poorly (doubtful)
-They're pro-life personal, pro-choice political... IE truly pro-choice, just they would personally choose life if in such a situation.
And on a complete tangent - they say our schools are liberal-indoctrination factories, kinda hard to buy that if nearly 3/4ths hold conservative/republican views, eh? wink
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 10:35 pm
Talon-chan It could mean a couple of other things: -They don't think 30 years of legal precident should be sent into termoil, but rather change should be made slowly and properly, not abrupt and possibly poorly (doubtful) -They're pro-life personal, pro-choice political... IE truly pro-choice, just they would personally choose life if in such a situation. And on a complete tangent - they say our schools are liberal-indoctrination factories, kinda hard to buy that if nearly 3/4ths hold conservative/republican views, eh? wink I personally believe that schools are like prisons and they are brainwashing kids and not telling the all the truth or the ones out here are like that. I don't mind learning, I just hated all the schools I went to. Yah it's bit hard to believe not i'm not into politics really so I have no idea what is what nor do I can. I believe the voting systmes are rigged.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:03 am
sachiko_sohma I personally believe that schools are like prisons and they are brainwashing kids and not telling the all the truth or the ones out here are like that. I don't mind learning, I just hated all the schools I went to. My experience is about the same. The only school I went to that didn't feel liek it was tryign to brain wash me with leftist politics or cram evolution down my throat was Garmich American School in Germany. I'm glad we have places like Kansas, who have peopel smart enough to realise the evolution may not be truth, and now want to teach somthign that opposes it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 11:27 am
Pyrotechnic Oracle sachiko_sohma I personally believe that schools are like prisons and they are brainwashing kids and not telling the all the truth or the ones out here are like that. I don't mind learning, I just hated all the schools I went to. My experience is about the same. The only school I went to that didn't feel liek it was tryign to brain wash me with leftist politics or cram evolution down my throat was Garmich American School in Germany. I'm glad we have places like Kansas, who have peopel smart enough to realise the evolution may not be truth, and now want to teach somthign that opposes it. Well things evolve over time but it didn't start that way, we were created and things change over time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 1:46 pm
Actually, this doesn't really suprise me. The vast majority of kids at my high school that I ask about abortion are pro-life, which is kinda suprising because I live in California.
But it's awesome to know that this is a nation-wide thing and not just my school. biggrin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:04 pm
I went to catholic schools for 12 years... I can say I was definately not in a liberal indoctrination factory...
Interesting though to think that someone who went to the liberal-factory public school system becomes quite conservative... and someone who went to a roman-catholic-conservative factory becomes quite liberal, eh?
My largest beef with Kansas is that ID isn't Science, it's philosophy. Nothing about intelligent disign is based on science, but rather it's an a posteriori ontological argument, so it seems weird to me that it would be in a science class, rather than a philosophy one, especially since I've taken philosophy of religion and ID was a huge part of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:24 pm
sachiko_sohma Pyrotechnic Oracle sachiko_sohma I personally believe that schools are like prisons and they are brainwashing kids and not telling the all the truth or the ones out here are like that. I don't mind learning, I just hated all the schools I went to. My experience is about the same. The only school I went to that didn't feel liek it was tryign to brain wash me with leftist politics or cram evolution down my throat was Garmich American School in Germany. I'm glad we have places like Kansas, who have peopel smart enough to realise the evolution may not be truth, and now want to teach somthign that opposes it. Well things evolve over time but it didn't start that way, we were created and things change over time. It's much more complicated then that, and the problem is that, despite what they tell oyu, there isn't much evidence to support darwinian evolution
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:31 pm
Talon-chan My largest beef with Kansas is that ID isn't Science, it's philosophy. Nothing about intelligent disign is based on science, but rather it's an a posteriori ontological argument, so it seems weird to me that it would be in a science class, rather than a philosophy one, especially since I've taken philosophy of religion and ID was a huge part of it. I have to laugh at that, becuase you assume that evolution is diffrent. The problem with both is that neither one can be proven or disproven, so niether one is really science. There is evidence on both sides, but not enough to say "This is what really happened." ID is mearly the gorund work of the beilive. There is actualy a hell of alot of science that follows it. Its mearly the process in which its all iterprited. Many ID beilivers believe the world was created in 6 days mabey a little over 10,000 years ago. Evolutions ist beilve that the world came to ghether by time and chance some odd billion years ago. The same goes for evolution. They assume that the earth is million of years old and build their work on that. Because both sciences are faith based, evolution is no more of a science then intelegent desighn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:32 pm
Pyrotechnic Oracle sachiko_sohma Pyrotechnic Oracle sachiko_sohma I personally believe that schools are like prisons and they are brainwashing kids and not telling the all the truth or the ones out here are like that. I don't mind learning, I just hated all the schools I went to. My experience is about the same. The only school I went to that didn't feel liek it was tryign to brain wash me with leftist politics or cram evolution down my throat was Garmich American School in Germany. I'm glad we have places like Kansas, who have peopel smart enough to realise the evolution may not be truth, and now want to teach somthign that opposes it. Well things evolve over time but it didn't start that way, we were created and things change over time. It's much more complicated then that, and the problem is that, despite what they tell oyu, there isn't much evidence to support darwinian evolution Good thing most scientist agree with you and do not support darwinian evolution wink Of course that doesn't mean they don't support evolution, it just means the theory has been changed a lot in the past 120 years. Rarely does any scientific theory remain stagnant... Gravity, Atoms, sub-atomic particles - all are theories that have changed greatly since their inception.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:34 pm
Talon-chan Pyrotechnic Oracle sachiko_sohma Pyrotechnic Oracle sachiko_sohma I personally believe that schools are like prisons and they are brainwashing kids and not telling the all the truth or the ones out here are like that. I don't mind learning, I just hated all the schools I went to. My experience is about the same. The only school I went to that didn't feel liek it was tryign to brain wash me with leftist politics or cram evolution down my throat was Garmich American School in Germany. I'm glad we have places like Kansas, who have peopel smart enough to realise the evolution may not be truth, and now want to teach somthign that opposes it. Well things evolve over time but it didn't start that way, we were created and things change over time. It's much more complicated then that, and the problem is that, despite what they tell oyu, there isn't much evidence to support darwinian evolution Good thing most scientist agree with you and do not support darwinian evolution wink Of course that doesn't mean they don't support evolution, it just means the theory has been changed a lot in the past 120 years. Rarely does any scientific theory remain stagnant... Gravity, Atoms, sub-atomic particles - all are theories that have changed greatly since their inception. Most sciences today are pointing to the beliefie that there was no change form one species to another, mearly change with in a species.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:39 pm
Pyrotechnic Oracle Talon-chan My largest beef with Kansas is that ID isn't Science, it's philosophy. Nothing about intelligent disign is based on science, but rather it's an a posteriori ontological argument, so it seems weird to me that it would be in a science class, rather than a philosophy one, especially since I've taken philosophy of religion and ID was a huge part of it. I have to laugh at that, becuase you assume that evolution is diffrent. The problem with both is that neither one can be proven or disproven, so niether one is really science. There is evidence on both sides, but not enough to say "This is what really happened." ID is mearly the gorund work of the beilive. There is actualy a hell of alot of science that follows it. Its mearly the process in which its all iterprited. Many ID beilivers believe the world was created in 6 days mabey a little over 10,000 years ago. Evolutions ist beilve that the world came to ghether by time and chance some odd billion years ago. The same goes for evolution. They assume that the earth is million of years old and build their work on that. Because both sciences are faith based, evolution is no more of a science then intelegent desighn. Evolution says nothing about the origin of the universe or the origin of the planet, only the method by which species developed. One can easily believe god created the universe, the planet, and life, but still believe that evolution adequately explains the history of this planet (well not strict creationists XD ) Evolution is based on the scientific method, whether or not they are right, whether or not they are wrong that is irrelevant. I mean the Bohr model of the atom was wrong, but for the times it was solidly based in science, for the time it was the best they had. ID follows no such method. That was all I sought to assert ^_^ I won't argue further than that though, even though I vehemently disagree with the notion evolution is based on faith or is somehow not scientific, because that is not what this guild is for and I don't want trouble smile
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:54 pm
Talon-chan Evolution is based on the scientific method, whether or not they are right, whether or not they are wrong that is irrelevant. I mean the Bohr model of the atom was wrong, but for the times it was solidly based in science, for the time it was the best they had. ID follows no such method. That was all I sought to assert ^_^ I won't argue further than that though, even though I vehemently disagree with the notion evolution is based on faith or is somehow not scientific, because that is not what this guild is for and I don't want trouble smile WHat is the scientific method? Well, a simple four step explination would be as follows. 1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena. 2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation. 3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations. 4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments. ID can follow the method, and it does. Evolutoin and ID are mearly ways to explain the origin of somthing. One says it evolved, another says an all powerful being created it. A creationist will pick up a fosolised bone and say "God made this." and will then preform all the steps of the SM to the letter. And evolutoinst will do the exact same thing with the excesption of the assumption of its origin. "THis animal must have evolved." Evolution is based on faith. No one has ever seen the evolution of one species into a completly diffrent one, and there is ingreasingly less evidence for it as our scientific tools become more powerful and more acurate. Because we can not prrove evolution actualy took place, we have to have faith that it did. Because we have no proof that a god created the universe and every thing in it, we have to have faith that he/she/it did. To reiderate, Creationist do follw the scientific method, we mearly have a diffrent way of interpriting the origin of the thing we are puttign through th SM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 3:01 pm
Talon-chan It could mean a couple of other things: -They don't think 30 years of legal precident should be sent into termoil, but rather change should be made slowly and properly, not abrupt and possibly poorly (doubtful) -They're pro-life personal, pro-choice political... IE truly pro-choice, just they would personally choose life if in such a situation. And on a complete tangent - they say our schools are liberal-indoctrination factories, kinda hard to buy that if nearly 3/4ths hold conservative/republican views, eh? wink The reason I say that many don't fully understand roe v. wade is because a majority say a woman who can't afford kids shouldn't be able to get an abortion, while a majority also say they support roe v. wade which legalized abortion for most cases. Actually law makers have been slowly hacking away at roe v. wade and setting up law structures so if it is overturned that it would quickly become illegal again. For example banning certain forms of abortion, making it count as two murders when someone kills a pregnant mother, ect. So it wouldn't necessarily be turmoil. As for the school thing, well kids hold conservative views on certain things and liberal on others, so neither side is completely happy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
