atheism

[Grim_Reefer]

No religion, no money, no war.

[Pali]

The U.S. already ranks pretty poorly behind other nations when it comes to pre-undergraduate level education Mudder.

A couple decades ago this was not the case... our level of investment in public education has dropped dramatically recently, and it's had terrible results.

P.S. Ants have neither religion nor money, but they still have wars. So would we.

[Mudder]

How do you know ants have no religion?

[Pali]

They lack the cognitive capacity.

[a-guitarist]

Glenn Beck is an ant?

a-g

[Icor]

I was home schooled my entire life, with the exception of kindergarten. Because of the ease in which I got into college, and the career opportunities I now have, I can tell you without the slightest shred of doubt that federally funded, or tax funded public schools are totally and completely unnecessary.

[Mudder]

Yes and without them you know what we would have?

Complete and utter social and economic inequalities much, much, worse than we already have. Basic education would become an upper middle class luxury.

Not many parents are smart enough or have the education themselves to properly teach their children. Fact would become a blur next to opinions and we, as a nation, would suffer horribly. I wonder if our economy would last more than one generation without the public school system.

[Pali]

I was home schooled my entire life' date=' with the exception of kindergarten. Because of the ease in which I got into college, and the career opportunities I now have, I can tell you without the slightest shred of doubt that federally funded, or tax funded public schools are totally and completely unnecessary.[/quote']

With respect, you are but one single case. There are innumerable families who simply are not capable of properly homeschooling their children for a variety of reasons (financial, the time investment required, etc.). There are also, quite frankly, innumerable people even among those who can do so who would be improperly homeschooling their children... children of creationists, for instance, would be far better served by a public school (imperfect though they are) than by their parents teaching them that the world is 6000 years old. EDIT: Not all people's situations are comparable to your own, Icor... which, by the way, the interaction with people of different backgrounds that can and should be fostered in public schools helps teach and which homeschooling cannot compete with.

And I would like to point out that many of the problems of our public education system are due to the people's unwillingness to invest substantially in them... as well as what I find to be a very disturbing growing cultural trend to denigrate intellectual achievements and science.

[J.Twendrist]

Not to mention... Who would Americanize all the children if public schools go away? Something I find ironic is that with public schools you more or less have kids raising kids, considering you spend more time with your classmates than many other people, especially when its 1 teacher per 30+ kids.

[Pali]

especially when its 1 teacher per 30+ kids.

This would be one of those problems I alluded to when I said that it's largely the people's fault for not being willing to invest in our schools.

[a-guitarist]

Pali, my issues on civil unions are they are aligned with religious philosophies, and not open to the people to decide. I fully respect a church not to issue a marriage to gays, but a state has no right to tell someone who they can and can not union with, in my eyes. Every state should butt out of love, in my eyes. And I believe we agree on that point.

Home schooling, I've seen it a double edged sword. Icor is a shining example of the success that is possible. I had a friend who, at the age of 16, was completely self taught at home school... his parents threw him a bunch of academic CDs and then set him on his own. He spent his times at 4chan and bittorrent sites. The kids education were pineapples shoved up anime girls and pornography. Another friend of mine was homeschool, but with very religious intonations. He is doing well, but lost his chance at a few jobs due to his science education being pure creationism. I'm fine with that, as if you wish to believe things due to religious implications, that is your right. He doesn't complain (anymore) about the job, he has another and is doing well. Another got his education, the same as I did, just at home. Got into college, failed out just like me, then got his crap together and is now working well.

While I'm still wishy washy on home schooling, I feel that too much emphasis and responsibility is put into the hands of the school. People demand that the schools raise their children (J.Twendrist saying "who will Americanize the child?"), but then refuse to allow the school to take the actions needed to make sure the child does as the parents expect. I don't advocate corporal punishment in the classroom, but if the kid doesn't want to be there and is a problem, eject them. Education is a right, public school (in my eyes) is a privilege. Own a firearm is a right, but the government has no obligation to give me, or anyone, a Mac-10, or a BB Gun for that matter. And no one complains about that.

Who will Americanize the child? I feel it should be the parents job to raise their child. If you can't feed them, if you can't raise them, if you can't educate them, then you shouldn't have them, and should give them to someone who can. But,, if you need help then I accept that. Everyone needs help at times, and it takes a village to raise a child... not a board of 3 to 5 adults who have no experience in modern school systems or the culture of current student dynamics.

The 30+ student class rooms is just horrible. I lived that, at times, in my High School. The time was spent not on the lesson, but the teacher baby sitting the children that acted out- with no motive other than to disrupt the class. When the student was sent out of the room or out of the school- they'd be back the next day and never moved again.

The public school system is broken, and with advent of these ZAP schools (Zeros Aren't Permitted) and any other idea that tells kids it's okay to be stupid. And that is what it is... how many of FL's playerbase is in education? There is really no way to describe that kids these days are surprisingly stupid. Are there successes? Yes, but the fact is a child getting the grades I did in high school, and retaining what I did is considered a success? I was a C student, at best, all the way through. It is nice to know that I was not left behind and that I am now the model of success for future generation.

Is the popularity of not failing students in the base that the school should be responsible for the child's self-esteme? If I failed a class, I was held back to retake it, held in during study halls or after school to make up the work. Did the teacher worry about my self esteem when I failed a test and then told me, "If you can't pass this, get ready to work at McDonalds with the rest of the idiots."? Yes. They were. They wanted me to feel good about myself when I was 40 and not working at McDonalds and realizing "hey, I'm finally being promoted to chief frier! Maybe in 10 more years I'll be a shift supervisor!"

I hate it here at FL... but maybe the US needs to Harden Up... we're all being a bunch of princesses.

a-g

[Mali]

Be nice to mudder!

[Mudder]

I think the Education system is MUCH less broke then you make it out to be. The only current problems tend to be in the areas with less money(which is a self-fulfilling prophecy). There will be much more investment in the public school system coming from the federal government in the next couple years. Let's see what happens.

EDIT: I Just read the link. It really isn't a bad idea. It isn't to say, "Hey, you failed? Don't worry, you didn't really. Just continue to slack off and we will pass you anyway."

It doesn't work like that. It gives students a second chance to actually DO the work. To MAKE the grade. How many students just screw up their GPA in Highschool and don't even apply to college because of it? A lot. Many of these students aren't even dumb but actually smart. Just have trouble getting motivated. The type of students that really don't care or give a damn about their life will still fail. This only helps those who are ready to get serious about their life and education. It can only help. Sure, in college these kids won't get similar treatment but at the same time, they know that. Teachers are always talking about college and how different it is. They'll figure it out. If they're able to get the ball rolling in Highschool (even after getting their H and then DOing the work to fix it) they are preparing themselves by changing their habits to better ones for college.

It has NOTHING to do about "Oh, he might feel bad." but it is everything to do with stopping a viscous cycle and a culture of failure. I've seen it in the schools and it has nothing to do with the school but the student him/herself. This is obviously experimental but I find it is much better than nothing. If it doesn't work it will go away. Simple as that.

EDIT2: Your friend getting taught new world creationism is a huge problem as education. It is a perfect example of why public schools are needed. Why? Because he was never given a choice to choose "what he believes in" he was taught a "fact" and now he is almost destined to believe it despite the odds. That's what happens when you hold a view since young childhood. His parents have severely hampered him in his life (if he is interested in any sort of science career, and it seems like he is) and just decided for him what he will believe. This is not only bad parenting, it is bad education.

RE Mali: That didn't even make sense.

[Icor]

Please don't think of me as selfish when I compare my case to everyone's, but when I say that I believe that federally funded public schools are unnecessary, I do believe that. There are alternatives to giving our kids to a system that the government has control of shaping, and I do believe there is an alternative for everyone.

There are support groups, there's the HSLDA, etc... It is becoming a popular thing now days simply because parents are learning that they don't have to be deprived of their kids 8 hours a day every week. They thought it was impossible or hard, but it isn't. But again, home schooling certainly isn't the only alternative. I'm not a communist or anything, but the more I think about socialized services, the more attractive they seem.

Whether or not its good for kids, perhaps my future kids, to be home schooled is not my biggest concern. What is important to me is that as a parent, I can decide what kind of education my kids get, whether its teaching them that they came from God, or came from a huge explosion. I'd prefer they know both stories and decide for themselves; I believe this is an adequate, if not the best way to make them critical thinkers.

Pali, you're definitely right about people not supporting their schools enough. It might be a little too late at this point, because schools started clinging on to federally subsidized money because they weren't getting enough from their communities in the first place.

[Pali]

Pali' date=' you're definitely right about people not supporting their schools enough. It might be a little too late at this point, because schools started clinging on to federally subsidized money [i']because they weren't getting enough from their communities in the first place.

I was also referring to the unwillingness to pay higher taxes.

I'd prefer they know both stories and decide for themselves; I believe this is an adequate, if not the best way to make them critical thinkers.

I'd agree that in an ideal setting this is the best. However, let me ask you this... what percentage of American parents do you think actually has an in-depth understanding of early universe cosmology? And biology? And chemistry? And physics, and history, and literature, and the arts, and philosophy? In schools we have different teachers for different subjects for a reason... no one is an expert on everything.

but a state has no right to tell someone who they can and can not union with

I agree. However, as our state currently DOES grant special legal rights to people for committed romantic unions, it should grant them to all who seek those unions regardless of who it involves.

[Mali]

Mudder, I defend you, and you turn on me... I'll never forget this.

[Icor]

Ehh, well... Pali, when me and my brother went through school, we had curriculum for every major subject. CDs, books, assignments, etc. Most of them were standard books used in public school classes. My mom knew English stuff, my dad was a math wiz'. Anything they didn't know could be found in books. You just have to care enough to search for the information on your own sometimes.

The christian science books contradicted the evolution ones, and the evolution ones contradicted the Christan ones. I understand that in a professional setting, "Christian Science" is an oxymoron; when I say Christian Science Book, what I really mean is that the book contained explanations for modern evidence contrary to evolution's explanation [i.e., Noah's flood made the Grand Canyon instead of wind erosion]. They didn't quote the bible or anything; they just another take on things.

We figured that if books existed with a different take, then it was meaningful to get the full circle of understanding.

There were a lot of contradictions between books when it came to origin theory and biological science. 9th grade was definitely bizarre for my parents. Everything else was normal... English, arithmetic, some extra stuff... we even took CAT9 tests.

[Mali]

The theory of evolution does not really address the grand canyon. ;p

You are thinking of geology.

[Mudder]

Mudder' date=' I defend you, and you turn on me... I'll never forget this.[/quote']

Lol, what? NooOO! Mali. Stop talking nonsense. I'll buy you a beer when I get back to the States.

And then another for getting into Grad school.

Then another for getting engaged.

[Icor]

I was using an example I'd experienced... one book said millions of years of erosion, the other said flood. I realize that either, or both, Creationism and Evolution theories have changed in the last 6 or so years.

[Mudder]

Creationism has never changed, by definition it does not change.

It only occasionally changes one word and attempts to repackage it as something new and better. Literally they have reprinted the exact same textbooks and changed God to Intelligent Designer.

EDIT: I live with two Geologists. One of which is incredibly open minded about religion. He argues with me all the time in it's favor. He thinks I am too firm of an atheist about something that I cannot prove. I promise, the idea that the Earth is less than even a billion years old is just wrong. It is very easy for religious people to know the world is older. Who says a day for god is a day for man? Especially since the concept of day was given to us by the sun and the sun didn't exist yet when "god created the universe."

There is a difference in denying reality and having faith. You do not have to have one to have the other.

[Icor]

Well, something certainly changed. I don't know what all yet, and I apologize if I'm behind the times a little.

[Pali]

Ehh' date=' well... Pali, when me and my brother went through school, we had curriculum for every major subject. CDs, books, assignments, etc. Most of them were standard books used in public school classes. My mom knew English stuff, my dad was a math wiz'. Anything they didn't know could be found in books. You just have to care enough to search for the information on your own sometimes.[/quote']

Unfortunately, not everyone has that motivation, time, or opportunity.

The christian science books contradicted the evolution ones, and the evolution ones contradicted the Christan ones. I understand that in a professional setting, "Christian Science" is an oxymoron; when I say Christian Science Book, what I really mean is that the book contained explanations for modern evidence contrary to evolution's explanation [i.e., Noah's flood made the Grand Canyon instead of wind erosion]. They didn't quote the bible or anything; they just another take on things.

This entire paragraph is a huge piece of support for my argument that home schooling tends to produce ignorance of various fields. First, as has been mentioned, evolution is biology, not geology... and I mean no offense to you personally by this, but the simple fact that you didn't distinguish between the two lowers my judgment on how effective your home-schooling was. Second, yes, "Christian science" is an oxymoron, because it isn't SCIENCE. Not only that, but much of it has been shown to be flat WRONG by science... to use your own example, the idea that lots of water flowing over a surface will produce something like the Grand Canyon in a short period of time has been tested and shown wrong. Erosion happens a TINY bit faster with lots of water as a result of the increased weight causing increased friction, but not nearly fast enough for a flood (even one lasting a couple months) to have created the Grand Canyon. In real science, when an idea is shown to be wrong, it gets abandoned.

We figured that if books existed with a different take, then it was meaningful to get the full circle of understanding.

Books also exist arguing that the world will end in 2012 because the Mayans predicted it in the Bronze Age, or that aliens abducted the writer or people within, or that the world is flat, or that psychic healing will cure cancer. That an idea is on paper does not make it an idea worth giving much credit to.

And Mudder, of course creationism has evolved... remember the intermediate form of "cdesign proponentists"? "Intelligent Design" was the new rallying cry for a while, and now it's "teach the controversy"... a controversy that doesn't exist at all in scientific circles, only in the minds of the badly educated public.

EDIT: I want to clarify one important thing here... while I do not think homeschooling to be a great idea as a general rule (though specific instances of it can be spectacular successes), I also think that the public school system we have currently is in an abysmal state. It is horrendously underfunded, overcrowded, and employs far too many people who are incompetent at their jobs. However, it is not necessarily destined to remain this way, and in fact in the past it was not this way either... in the 50's and 60's, for instance, our education system was the best in the world. The thing is, back then we were willing to grant education a proper respect and we were willing to invest a great deal in it. Now, that isn't the case, and it's causing the very problems that people that don't support it use to attack it.

[Mudder]

In Icor's defense, while there is a difference between geology and biology, the idea of evolution can and is easily applied to both.

[Pali]

In Icor's defense' date=' while there is a difference between geology and biology, the idea of evolution can and is easily applied to both. [/quote']

Yes, though this is unfortunate in the sense that creationists use that fact to confuse the issue and make "evolutionism" into an atheistic religion in the minds of many people. The word evolution itself simply means change over time, and can be applied to geology, astronomy (i.e. stellar evolution is a commonly used term in this field and probably will be found in most textbooks on the subject), and frankly anywhere else that has systems that change as time passes. However, in biology, the word evolution almost always refers specifically to the theory of natural selection, and it is this theory that creationists actually have their main problem with: the idea that humanity's roots lie not in God, but that we came about through thoughtless, purely natural processes.

EDIT: And before I confuse anyone by yet another word's unfortunate separate definitions that apply in other contexts... when I use the word "theory" here, I refer specifically to the use it has in science: a well-tested (and still tested constantly by new discoveries, I might add) model that ties together a wide range of facts and laws to create a greater understanding of how they fit together. Fact and law are also used under their specific scientific contexts... a fact is a repeatable, objectively verifiable observation and a law is a thus-far-observed-to-be-universal description of behavior (i.e. the second law of thermodynamics, that entropy [if you don't know what this means, look it up] within a closed system will continually increase - this has never been observed to not be the case).