Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Archbishop: "Stop Teaching Creationism"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
GCP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 06:32 AM
Original message
Archbishop: "Stop Teaching Creationism"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,1735730,00.html

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has stepped into the controversy between religious fundamentalists and scientists by saying that he does not believe that creationism - the Bible-based account of the origins of the world - should be taught in schools.
Giving his first, wide-ranging, interview at Lambeth Palace, the archbishop was emphatic in his criticism of creationism being taught in the classroom, as is happening in two city academies founded by the evangelical Christian businessman Sir Peter Vardy and several other schools.

"I think creationism is ... a kind of category mistake, as if the Bible were a theory like other theories ... if creationism is presented as a stark alternative theory alongside other theories I think there's just been a jarring of categories ... My worry is creationism can end up reducing the doctrine of creation rather than enhancing it," he said.
The debate over creationism or its slightly more sophisticated offshoot, so-called "intelligent design" (ID) which argues that creation is so complex that an intelligent - religious - force must have directed it, has provoked divisions in Britain but nothing like the vehemence or politicisation of the debate in the US. There, under pressure from the religious right, some states are considering giving ID equal prominence to Darwinism, the generally scientifically accepted account of the evolution of species. Most scientists believe that ID is little more than an attempt to smuggle fundamentalist Christianity into science teaching.

States from Ohio to California are considering placing ID it on the curriculum, with President George Bush telling reporters last August that "both sides ought to be properly taught ... so people can understand what the debate is about." The archbishop's remarks place him firmly on the side of science.

Damn - makes me proud to be British!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Taxloss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 06:40 AM
Response to Original message
1. Makes me proud as well.
And, thanks to the fact that the church of England is an Established church, this can overrule the schools, I believe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 07:32 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. I don't think so - Vardy's schools are non-denominational
so no church can direct them. It's entirely up to Vardy, his governors, headteachers and teachers, as long as they fulfill the National Curriculum. If any C of E voluntary-aided schools were thinking of teaching creationism, this should have an effect there, though.

You do know Williams used to be Dean of Clare College, don't you? :-)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taxloss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Yes, it's a college with a strong liberal tradition.
Latimer was there, famously. Plus another dean there was Maurice Wiles, an extremely distant relative of mine and noted Anglican sceptic:

http://homepages.which.net/~radical.faith/thought/wiles.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baby_mouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 06:53 AM
Response to Original message
2. An wise approach.

Well done, sir!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChristianLibrul Donating Member (218 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 07:06 AM
Response to Original message
3. ID v Ego
If theofascists didn't have a pathological need to be better than everybody else, they'd realize two things: The Bible isn't a weapon God gave us to demonize people we don't like; the Bible isn't a scientific textbook.

Anyone can accept the Bible as divinely-inspired writings by men who wished to explain God, as they understood Him/Her/It. That something like "The Creation" wasn't exactly understood scientifically thousands of years ago takes nothing away from the Bible or its authors.

Claiming that the King James Bible is literally true does. It is the least accurate translation from the Greek, as has been shown many times. Insisting it is The Truth is exactly like insisting Saddam had WMDs and backed 9-11.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wryter2000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #3
11. Well done, Christianlibrul
I've often tried to make the same points but haven't done it so well.

Welcome to DU :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #3
17. There are worse translations than the KJV
But biblical literalism is doomed to failure.

Heck, four words into the Bible and you're already in trouble.

"In the beginning, God..." implies that God was there before the beginning, implying a beginning before the beginning and we're chasing our tail. It also contradicts the beginning of John.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 07:09 AM
Response to Original message
4. Excellent article
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe_VB Donating Member (336 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 08:34 AM
Response to Original message
7. Down with George Wahington, God save the King...............
Is it to late for me to change sides?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 09:26 AM
Response to Original message
8. Well God is so complex he must have been created by an intelligent being
:shrug: Like maybe man.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidDvorkin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Toots, that's brilliant.
I mean it. That's a wonderful, concise response to the argument from complexity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eppur_se_muova Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #8
18. Always said Man created God in his own image...deeply flawed. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wryter2000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 10:36 AM
Response to Original message
10. Makes me proud to be Episcopalian
That's my (former) church.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
savemefromdumbya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
12. Archbishop: Stop teaching creationism (Guardian UK 3/21/06)
Here we have the head of the Church of England saying:

Archbishop: stop teaching creationism

Williams backs science over Bible

Stephen Bates, religious affairs correspondent
Tuesday March 21, 2006
The Guardian

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has stepped into the controversy between religious fundamentalists and scientists by saying that he does not believe that creationism - the Bible-based account of the origins of the world - should be taught in schools.
Giving his first, wide-ranging, interview at Lambeth Palace, the archbishop was emphatic in his criticism of creationism being taught in the classroom, as is happening in two city academies founded by the evangelical Christian businessman Sir Peter Vardy and several other schools.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,1735730,00.html

:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dragonbreathp9d Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Alright! Props to him!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. KUDOS to Archbishop Williams!
Who, btw, denounced bush's illegal immoral unjust Hitleresque war of aggression against Iraq (as did most church leaders around the world, INCLUDING bush's own.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
savemefromdumbya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. He's definitiely (one of us)
dynamite!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 11:33 AM
Response to Original message
16. KICK and recomended!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
teknomanzer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 10:51 PM
Response to Original message
19. Problems with intelligent design...
First off, if life was created by an intelligent designer, by what means did the designer come into being? (cue the sound of crickets)

Next, upon critical examination it appears that systems develop from simple forms into more complex forms. The development of complex life is no more supernatural than the development of a solar system from a cloud of dust and gas. In other words, there is no need for an intelligent designer - evolution is the result of the laws of nature. Why is it necessary for the universe to have been created? Why can't we assume that it has always been, in a constant state of flux, expanding and collapsing? What if there is no beginning and no end? Is that too hard to imagine? More difficult to imagine than some immense superbeing who has nothing better to do than to monitor and intervene in the goings on of a mediocre group of hairless talking primates isolated on some insignificant rock hurling about an average star in the spiral arm of one of trillions or more existing galaxies?

Lastly, if the intelligent designer is in fact God then I say prove it... your assertion must be testable. If you can't test the claim its not science its fantastic speculation and shouldn't be taught in a science class.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 11th 2024, 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC