Should witch craft, faith healing, crop circles, chakra, crystal healing, and fortune telling be taught in science classes?

[MrFun]

Wow Mr. Fun attacking Christianity. That's never been done before.

I'm not attacking Christianity.

[Ben Kenobi]

I'm not attacking Christianity.

Which is why the word 'Christ' appears in the poll.

[loinburger]

Hmmmm ... what happened that half of text in the poll got italicized?

Wait, so it got half-italicized because I tried circumventing the auto-censor?

You used shi<i>t when you should have used shi<i></i>t or shi<!>t

Which is why the word 'Christ' appears in the poll.

The word "Christ" does not appear in the poll

[MrFun]

Which is why the word 'Christ' appears in the poll.

I'm attacking the notion of teaching Christian creationism as science. I'm not attacking Christianity itself.

[MrFun]

You used shi < i > t when you should have used shit or shit

Doh!

[loinburger]

By Ben's reasoning, it's an attack on Christianity to criticize the white supremacist Christian Identity movement since they have the word "Christian" in their name. Then again, given Ben's love of South Africa's "golden age" of apartheid, it would not come as a surprise to learn that he supported the Christian Identity movement (independent of their name).

[rah]

By Ben's reasoning

You've got to be kidding.

[MrFun]

By Ben's reasoning, it's an attack on Christianity to criticize the white supremacist Christian Identity movement since they have the word "Christian" in their name. Then again, given Ben's love of South Africa's "golden age" of apartheid, it would not come as a surprise to learn that he supported the Christian Identity movement (independent of their name).

QFT

[snoopy369]

I think you should teach those things in religion classes. I also think we should have a mandatory comparative religion class in high school.

[giblets]

Why do people like to take the things they're interested and make them mandatory subjects for high schoolers rather than let the high schoolers pick the subjects they're interested in learning about?

[snoopy369]

Mandatory classes = things they need to learn to live as a reasonably-educated adult. Religion (from the standpoint of having an adult understanding, not just 'I believe this because mommy told me to, and my religion IS THE ONLY RELIGION NOW I WILL HIT YOU WITH A STICK') is one of those things. Teach a reasonable comparative religion class - one that is not anti-religion, but describes religions from the fundamental level up - would result in a far-better educated populace that still likely was quite religious, but replaced religious craziness with intelligence. Lots of intelligent people are truly religious, and the reverse; but I'd like to convert the Bens and Kids of the world into Imrans (and probably lots of other Polytoners, Imran's the first that comes to mind).

[giblets]

If someone isn't interested in learning something, chances are the content of the required course won't stick. Plenty of Americans are thoroughly ignorant of geography in spite of being forced to take it in high school because it didn't interest them. No matter how wonderful and mature someone considers knowledge of the five pillars of Islam and the eightfold path forcing everyone to take a course on the subject won't achieve the intended result of making everyone internalize that knowledge (although clearly the material should be offered).

[Sava]

I don't care what happens in Louisiana. **** that state. We should relocate all the blacks and bomb everyone else into oblivion... then push the rubble into the Gulf.

[snoopy369]

Gribbler, we have required courses for a reason - to at least attempt to teach people certain things that are deemed 'important' to know. I think this should be one of them. You're more than welcome to argue with the concept of 'required course', but that's outside the purview of this discussion.

[giblets]

Gribbler, we have required courses for a reason - to at least attempt to teach people certain things that are deemed 'important' to know. I think this should be one of them. You're more than welcome to argue with the concept of 'required course', but that's outside the purview of this discussion.

My original comment questioned the usefulness of required courses in general. If you are not interested in explaining why you are generally in favor of forcing high school students to learn about things that do not interest them, the effectiveness of doing so be damned, then I don't see why you responded to my comment.