This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Home-schooling special: Preach your children well

Home-schooling special: Preach your children well - Comments

Cineaste's Avatar Comment 1 by Cineaste

Jesus that is some scary stuff. These people want the Dark Ages all over again.

Thu, 09 Nov 2006 19:03:00 UTC | #7355

Randy Ping's Avatar Comment 2 by Randy Ping

They'll be burning witches soon... and scientists count as practitioners in their book.

Thu, 09 Nov 2006 20:16:00 UTC | #7363

John's Avatar Comment 3 by John

I think I am going to move to Holland, or the Czech Republic where people actually think logically, and revere evidence as something upon which to form beliefs. I have a feeling the USA is going backwards very fast, and there is not much us 'rationalists' can do about it. It saddens me deeply; the direction this country is going. I wish I had 'faith' that athiests can help to change this: as christians call it 'backsliding.' I have a feeling things are going to get much worse in this country because of religious fundamentalism. I do not understand how someone can simply throw out all the evidence for the universe being 14 billion years old, and disregard the evidence that the earth is 4.5 billion years old. Moreover, the FACT that evolution is a FACT!!!!! Do these people not get flu shots, or wonder why staph infections are on the rise? Do they even care about people with HIV and why modern science has a very hard time treating this virus? What about the fossil record? I would like to think that the only reason people believe in GOD is because it has not explained(satisfactorily) the origin of the universe(before the big bang.) However, it seems that no matter what we discover thorough the rigorous scientific process (of observation, repeatibility, and falsifiability) religous fundamentalists (and moderates) will invent some new way to believe in GOD (Professor Dawkins calls this the moral ZEITGEIST.)
In conclusion, I want to get back to my statements in the first sentence of this post. I want to move to Holland or the Czech Republic, because both of these countries are at least 57% athiest. And, I ask if there is anyone from these countries (or the many European countries like these) out there; why, or what, and how did you country become this way. I, and America need your advice and help to somehow reverse this 'backslide.'

Thu, 09 Nov 2006 21:15:00 UTC | #7374

Stewart's Avatar Comment 4 by Stewart

PHC is hardly news anymore, but those for whom it is news should also be aware of the Statement of Faith all students must sign. Taken from the PHC website (check out their Biblical Worldview, as well). Anytime you run into a PHC graduate, don't forget he/she has signed the following, conscious torment for eternity and all:

• There is one God, eternally existent in three Persons:
Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
• God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must
worship Him in Spirit and in truth.
• Jesus Christ, born of a virgin, is God come in the flesh.
• The Bible in its entirety (all 66 books of the Old and
New Testaments) is the inspired Word of God,
inerrant in its original autographs, and the only
infallible and sufficient authority for faith and
Christian living.
• Man is by nature sinful and is inherently in need of
salvation, which is exclusively found by faith alone in
Jesus Christ and His shed blood.
• Christ's death provides substitutionary atonement for
our sins.
• Personal salvation comes to mankind by grace through
faith.
• Jesus Christ literally rose bodily from the dead.
• Jesus Christ literally will come to earth again in the
Second Advent.
• Satan exists as a personal, malevolent being who acts as
temptor and accusor, for whom Hell, the place for
eternal punishment, was prepared, where all who die
outside of Christ shall be confined in conscious
torment for eternity.
I
CERTIFY THAT
: I fully and enthusiastically subscribe to the
above statement of faith. I also certify that I have accepted
Jesus Christ as my personal Savior for forgiveness of my
sins.

Fri, 10 Nov 2006 01:49:00 UTC | #7381

Masrock's Avatar Comment 5 by Masrock

With luck Natural selection with sort these pseudo-scientists out.

"Home-schoolers are going to be leaders in their field," says Wile. "They are going to change science and how science is done.""

This will only be true if it involves elections- they won't be able to advance their scientific careers because they will be 'knowledge disabled".

We already have politicians and a media with limited scientific knowledge so these people will be just continuing the trend, the real challenge is to get scientists into office and I fear we are too honest for that.

Masrock

Fri, 10 Nov 2006 02:00:00 UTC | #7383

Phil's Avatar Comment 6 by Phil

As a university student living in the US, all that I can say about the 16th paragraph starting with "Exodus Mandate is urging each....." is Holy Shit. I cannot say that I didn't think that that was their intention but Damn! That is truly dangerous. I hope that we can find some way of stopping them.

Fri, 10 Nov 2006 10:51:00 UTC | #7419

Tara's Avatar Comment 7 by Tara

This is a rather inaccurate portrayal of homeschoolers. Homeschooling has become much less religious, and more mainstream of late and most parents choose to homeschool for academic reasons, not religious ones. The public schools continue to educate the vast majority of U.S. students and do an abysmal job of science education. Homeschooling is hardly the reason that the American high school student does poorly in scientific reasoning. The science textbooks used in public schools have received terrible reviews from academics, revealing many flaws. We are an atheist homeschooling family pursuing a rigorous science curriculum and we are far from being an anomaly.

Fri, 10 Nov 2006 19:10:00 UTC | #7450

Martha's Avatar Comment 8 by Martha

It is unfair to tar all home educators with the HSLDA and Patrick Henry brush. These HSLDA/PHC people are only a very small part of a much larger home education community, in much the same way that Wahabi Muslims in Saudi Arabia are only one very small group within Islam.

This skewed characterization of home education culture and history is therefore off the mark. Many home educators are atheists, Ivy League graduates, scientists, etc. I suggest that those who want to obtain an accurate overview, who want to investigate both sides of the question in the objective tradition they claim to espouse, should check out www.quaqua.org/list.htm, www.quaqua.org/history.htm. and www.quaqua.org/protegerec.htm.

Mon, 13 Nov 2006 12:37:00 UTC | #7682

John's Avatar Comment 9 by John

Tara,
I have a feeling you are the exception and not the rule!!

Mon, 13 Nov 2006 18:51:00 UTC | #7711

John's Avatar Comment 10 by John

And Martha

Mon, 13 Nov 2006 18:53:00 UTC | #7712

Michael Enquist's Avatar Comment 11 by Michael Enquist

I hate these kinds of articles. I could tell from the start that it was going to be a "look at these Xtian homeschoolers - They're going to take over the world!" Whether they're Xtians or whatever, the advantage they have over the rest is that their parents are willing to put a lot more effort and a lot more of their own money into making sure the kids get a deep education: Even if it is their unrealistic kind of education.

If non-believers are worried about the number of homeschooled Xtians being groomed for political life, then non-believers need to start grooming their kids for political life. The only thing the Xtians have over us is better organization skills, and perhaps more zeal.

You make your future not only by what you do, but also by what you don't do.

Tue, 14 Nov 2006 16:55:00 UTC | #7769

Hunan Shrimp's Avatar Comment 12 by Hunan Shrimp

I live next to Patrick Henry, they advocate thier views in the community and most ppl agree with them unfortunately so they always seem to dictate the "community standards" for everything

Thu, 18 Jan 2007 17:28:00 UTC | #16176

demongoddess's Avatar Comment 13 by demongoddess

After reading this article it was impossible to not leave behind an impression of the feelings I felt after reading it.

The idea that such a school could do so well politically for its students makes me question if whether public schools are adequate in providing an education that would rival those of private and home schooling. I still consider trading my beliefs for an education with connections to the poltical world, that would enable me to seek a career in politics.

Perhaps it is correct to consider the idea that we are not doing enough for our children to prepare them for the coming civil war, whether it be fought in the legal system or on the fields.

My final piece is to Bruce whos comment I found particularly interesting.
"Wow, there sure are a lot of brilliant scientists on this site. You must all be way more intelligent than Copernicus, Galileo, Planck, Kelvin, Mendel, Faraday, Boyle, Kepler, Newton, Einstein... Only a... What was that again?... "Stupid, ignorant, or insane person" could believe in a God."

A stupid person is not one that could believe in god, but one that in the face of undeniable proof could believe the world is only six thousand years old.

Sat, 23 Jun 2007 23:11:00 UTC | #48616

JG2007's Avatar Comment 14 by JG2007

I homeschool my children because I want them to know the truth about everything!

Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:01:00 UTC | #54516

dogsmycopilot's Avatar Comment 15 by dogsmycopilot

Not all of the homeschoolers are evangelicals. Many of us home school because we do not want such dribble taught to our children. If organizations like American Atheist and others get home schooling outlawed it will force our children to the religion the public school teachers are shoving down the throats of innocent children. Is this what you want?

Thu, 08 May 2008 08:02:00 UTC | #167836

irate_atheist's Avatar Comment 16 by irate_atheist

Time for me to come off the fence:

Fucking twats. A waste of valuable oxygen, every one of them..

Thank you.

Thu, 08 May 2008 08:14:00 UTC | #167839

epeeist's Avatar Comment 17 by epeeist

There was a recent report showing that children who had gone to pre-school had a reduced risk of leukemia (http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=29990286-3bef-4773-97e8-3d65f7f9cf77&k=74971).

Given that home schooled children presumably mix with fewer children then this presumably means they are in the higher risk group. Assuming that prayer doesn't manage to keep it away.

Thu, 08 May 2008 08:27:00 UTC | #167844

Cartomancer's Avatar Comment 18 by Cartomancer

Last year, Exodus Mandate introduced a resolution asking SBC parents to conduct a "homosexual school risk audit" of their local public school, a survey to "make Christian parents and pastors more aware of the aggressive homosexual activism being sponsored by many public schools". The resolution was passed. The "risk audit" claims, among other things, that being homosexual "reduces life expectancy at age 20 by at least 8 to 20 years" or "substantially increases the risk of contracting breast cancer".
Why is this not illegal in the states? Surely such vileness should be anathema to a country which values tolerance and inclusivity among its founding virtues? This is hate speech - incitement to discrimination, plain and simple. It's fraud, misrepresentation, corruption of public information - it's just plain lying.

Would such things be allowed if the bigoted christian machiavels demanded a "negroid school risk audit" and claimed that being black reduced life expectancy by twenty years? What about a "sinister school risk audit" which claimed left-handedness increased the risk of breast cancer? Why is your government not doing anything about it?

Oh yes, that's right, it's because these worthless sacks of suppurant human detritus are actually running it...

The foul black ichor that serves me for blood is veritably boiling in my veins.

Thu, 08 May 2008 09:00:00 UTC | #167849

TheCreator'sChild's Avatar Comment 19 by TheCreator'sChild

"A stupid person is not one that could believe in god, but one that in the face of undeniable proof could believe the world is only six thousand years old."

Please, demongoddess, show to me the undeniable proof that the world is more than 6000 years old...

I have yet to believe that claim.

Mon, 08 Feb 2010 23:59:00 UTC | #439851

Quine's Avatar Comment 20 by Quine

Comment #459527 by TheCreator'sChild:

Please, demongoddess, show to me the undeniable proof that the world is more than 6000 years old...
There are tree ring sets going back over 10,000 years; you can undeniably count them. There is much stronger evidence in rocks and atoms going back 4.5 billion years, and in light traveling the Universe for over 13.7 billion years. If you have evidence against this, bring it.

Tue, 09 Feb 2010 01:53:00 UTC | #439871

TheCreator'sChild's Avatar Comment 21 by TheCreator'sChild

Tree ring sets--as I am sure that you know, there are false rings in trees, rings that form yet do not signify a season or year. Yet these are often counted. Those that count the rings leave room for these mistakes, but they do this by adding years on. Do you see the error in this? Trees are also subject to change in the environment around--fire, extreme cold, drought--therefore the rings are do not always provide an accurate figure.

The evidence found in rocks and atoms going back 4.5 billion years has not been proven. Is there a rock or an atom from the 4.5 billion years ago that has been guarded, protected, and kept from all changes in the atmosphere and environment? There is not. Before claiming that anything is, for certain, a specific age, you must test something of an absolutely known age, and yet we were not there at the beginning, so we do not have any piece of evidence that is 4.5 billion years old. No one can scientifically prove anything 100%, for we can only use observational science to do that. But when debating on the origin of the Universe, we use historical science: our own beliefs and axioms, to come up with conclusions.

As to the light traveling in the Universe for over 13.7 billion years, I have not heard of that and have yet to research it, but thank you for bringing that to my attention.

God Bless

Tue, 16 Feb 2010 02:42:00 UTC | #441710

Goldy's Avatar Comment 22 by Goldy

Comment #461427 by TheCreator\'sChild
??????????
Are you for real? ;-) Yes, of course you are. Now, do you have any solid proof that your claims are correct?

This home schooling malarkey - if I read this right, it's basically because some people don't want their little children "contaminated" by...well, whatever it is they don't like. Morality is something I hear a bit, but then I read this http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/7189188/Atheists-just-as-ethical-as-churchgoers.html
:-D
Admit it, home schoolers - you just don't want little Johnny to sit next to those mucky kids from the other side of the tracks, eh?

Tue, 16 Feb 2010 03:03:00 UTC | #441713

Sciros's Avatar Comment 23 by Sciros

Hahahah this guy's a riot. What about rings in trees coinciding with known droughts, which kind of throws off your whole "tree rings can't be trusted" nonsense.

To those interested (not that Creator's Child goon), much like with annual rings in trees, there are of course annual layers to ice. Annual melts in the warmer season create layers. These also coincide with historically known events (volcanic eruptions, etc.) well enough that we know they're accurate. And guess what, there are ice cores from the Antarctic with well over 100,000 layers. Something like 160,000, give-or-take.

Honestly, a working computer and a (believed-in) Bible just don't belong in the same household, unless you think the computer is powered by faeries and goblins.

Tue, 16 Feb 2010 03:31:00 UTC | #441718

Goldy's Avatar Comment 24 by Goldy

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/16/science/16archeo.html?8dpc

Of course, the experts are probably wrong and someone with a text of mythology is probably right... ;-)

Tue, 16 Feb 2010 03:31:00 UTC | #441719

TheCreator'sChild's Avatar Comment 25 by TheCreator'sChild

I don't have time to put all of my sites/resources down now, so here's one to begin with:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v17/i3/living_tree.asp

I never said that atheists are 'less moral' than theists, but morality is something that cannot be in your worldview. Where did right and wrong come from?
"But people who did not have a religious background still appeared to have intuitive judgments of right and wrong in common with believers"
Do you know why that is so? Because when Adam ate the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, his eyes were opened, and he saw right and wrong, good and evil. That's why we know, even if one does not believe in God!

Tue, 16 Feb 2010 03:40:00 UTC | #441721

Sciros's Avatar Comment 26 by Sciros

Do you know why that is so? Because when Adam ate the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, his eyes were opened, and he saw right and wrong, good and evil. That's why we know, even if one does not believe in God!
That makes perfect sense! I have to conclude that your god wanted a monopoly on the knowledge of good and evil; he wanted to be the only one with that awesome secret, so when Adam ate the fruit and the fruit told him stuff like it's generally bad to eat your own babies or use condoms, god was all "what the fuck bro I told you, if you want to know what's good and what's bad, talk to me, don't go eating from that tree, jesus christ what a jackass" and he banished Adam and Eve for it. Your god is a dick by modern moral standards, you know.

Tue, 16 Feb 2010 03:51:00 UTC | #441723

Quine's Avatar Comment 27 by Quine

<!-- -->Comment #461438 by TheCreator'sChild:

I don't have time to put all of my sites/resources down now, so here's one to begin with:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v17/i3/living_tree.asp
Well, that one had nothing about modern dendrochronology or how that is used as part of comprehensive fossil dating. What else have you got?

P.S. If you want to get a quick understanding of the subject, watch this video.

Tue, 16 Feb 2010 04:46:00 UTC | #441731

mmurray's Avatar Comment 28 by mmurray

I don't have time to put all of my sites/resources down now, so here's one to begin with:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v17/i3/living_tree.asp


There is no point in quoting AIG here. If they had something we couldn't answer someone else would have bought it up by now.

And what Quine said. Tree rings can be overlapped allowing you to go back well beyond the ludicrous Flood. See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendrochronology

or Richard Dawin's latest book which has an excellent section on dating.


I never said that atheists are 'less moral' than theists, but morality is something that cannot be in your worldview. Where did right and wrong come from?


We are a social species of primate. As such we tend to feel empathy towards those in our social group and antipathy to others. Layer over that a powerful brain and a tendency to impute intention to everything we see and I think you have a plausible argument for obtaining humans with a basic `golden rule' morality and a sense of right and wrong.

You could ask why we are so often hostile to people we deem to be outside our group. Did some God plant that in us at the moment of creation ? Why would s/he do that ? I think I prefer the social primate theory.

Do you know why that is so? Because when Adam ate the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, his eyes were opened, and he saw right and wrong, good and evil. That's why we know, even if one does not believe in God!


Do you really mean that literally ? With the snake and the rib and everything ?


Michael

Tue, 16 Feb 2010 06:35:00 UTC | #441738

TheCreator'sChild's Avatar Comment 29 by TheCreator'sChild

Literally? Why should I not believe so?

Do you literally believe that the Universe expanded from nothing?
Do you literally believe that life came from...well, actually, I don't think that I've ever heard an evolutionist give an adequate response to that...

Every religion has its skeptics and critics, so why can I not be skeptical about yours when mine is so constantly hammered?

Yes, sir, the snake and the rib and everything.

Tue, 16 Feb 2010 07:49:00 UTC | #441744

mmurray's Avatar Comment 30 by mmurray


Do you literally believe that the Universe expanded from nothing?

Do you literally believe that life came from..


I believe that science is the only effective tool we have to understand reality. If the scientific consensus is that these things are true that is fine by me. I'm not personally qualified to challenge either of these theories.


.well, actually, I don't think that I've ever heard an evolutionist give an adequate response to that...


Have you talked to any? Or tried wikipedia ? There are actually some reasonable ideas of what form abiogenisis might have taken. But I don't think it is something there is an agreed opinion on amongst scientists.


Every religion has its skeptics and critics, so why can I not be skeptical about yours when mine is so constantly hammered?


I don't have a religion. As for the hammering what do you expect on Richard Dawkin's website when all you can muster is stuff like:


Yes, sir, the snake and the rib and everything.


Michael

Tue, 16 Feb 2010 08:41:00 UTC | #441746