Optional page text here. The Beast's Lair: 92%

Thursday, November 10, 2005


That is the percentage of Americans who believe in God. Obviously, that is not the percentage who worship Him and offer their lives to Him, but nevertheless according to a recent poll, 92% of Americans believe in God.

I found this to be interesting as I caught a 15 second clip of Pat Robertson. (Somehow it was on while Andi and I were doing dishes. Actually she was doing dishes and I was flirting with her.) Anyway, he actually made a good point. There was a case in the news again of a school refusing to teach the possibility of God being involved in the creative process, only adhering to the evolution theories. Pat suggested that putting aside faith and worship, it would make sense to at least offer the possibility of God being the Creator, seeing how 92% of the country believes in Him, and it is a rather popular view of creation.

While at Belmont, my religion professors were big time into what they called "real education." What that meant for them was that the religion students were not taught only Baptist ideologies and theories, but that we were also made aware of other faiths, other beliefs, other possibilities. Isn't it similar to think that in the school classroom it would make sense to at least offer the other option of creation, not as a worship, church thing, but as saying, "hey, here is another possibility that is supported by a huge number of Americans, even many who do not practice faith or religion." Isn't that education? Placing the options on the table and allowing the students to think for themselves?

In the assassination of JFK, conspiracy theorists began to make up the stupidest crap you can imagine as to how JFK was shot. Americans being who we are, we ate it up. Most people even today will hold to a conspiracy theory with 2 gunmen, one on the grassy knoll and one holding an umbrella. Where did I learn about this stuff? In school. I will never forget the session in my 9th grade year on JFK. The school brought in a CONSPIRACY EXPERT to show the entire 9th grade class pictures that he had doctored where you can see the gunmen, etc. All of it was hogwash, but they thought we should know the other possibility out there besides Lee Harvey Oswald being the sole assassin. Would we have had a 9th grade assembly if only 1,000 people supported the conspiracy theories? Of course not. But because a huge number of Americans believed in this stuff, even as dumb as it was, the school taught it. It doesn't make sense to keep out the God creation theory, which is supported by millions of people, just because it deals with God. That is a lack of education.


Blogger ukok said...

Interesting ovbservations, I enjoyed reading them.

God Bless!

November 10, 2005 11:34 AM  
Blogger Barry said...

Dude, you're married. Flirting's over - get to work!

November 10, 2005 1:36 PM  
Anonymous Faith said...

Very good point - why can't other people see it that way?

November 10, 2005 2:57 PM  
Anonymous rexwilder said...

The problem, of course, is the court's interpretation of the First Amendment over the years. What you are saying does happen in private schools all over the country, but when public, taxpayer funded schools are at issue, the Constitution comes into play. Now if one doesn't agree with the court's rulings on the First Amendment (mainly the Supreme Court's), the law can be changed through amendments to the Constitution, and if 92% of the American people wanted that....it would probably happen. But the difference between believing in God and wanting our government to be involved in making a teaching decision about religion (which religion's version of "god" gets taught, which interpretation of creation gets taught, etc.) is substantial, which is why in my opinion changing this law never goes anywhere. Interestingly, many of the people (although I am not saying you would, this is abstract not personal) who would agree with this concept would also be the people that say government (i.e. public school) has no right to teach my kids about birth control, abortion, sexual issues, etc., since that is for the family to handle. Also, I wonder what there really is to "learn" about God creating the universe, etc? Wouldn't that necessarily require a religious discussion? I mean evolution and the scientific theories surrounding it have very important scientific, biological/social roots to be studied whether it is true or not. What can you study about creation without it becoming a religious discussion? Interesting.

November 10, 2005 4:01 PM  
Blogger The Beast said...

Funny you should mention the sex and government in school issue. Check out this quote from the federal court of appeals:

"We ... hold that there is no fundamental right of parents to be the exclusive provider of information regarding sexual matters to their children ....

Parents have no due process or privacy right to override the determinations of public schools as to the information to which their children will be exposed while enrolled as students."

Judge Stephen Reinhardt, Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

I have always been a supporter of public schools, and graduated from one. But when a school presents sexual material to my future son or daughter and tells me to mind my own business, that is a place I can't go.

Now, back to the God issue. The problem I see with your arguement of God ultimately leading to a relgious discussion in the classroom is that I have sat through many classes myself, in a religion program even, and studied the stories, myths, legends, etc surrounding God that remained at a level of academia. Does the very mention of the name God make it a religious discussion? All you have to do it turn on the Discovery Channel during one of their "History of the Bible" deals and listen to professional after professional who make a living of studying the history of God without applying one ounce of religion or practice.

Now, I don't know the specifics of the courts ruling of the 1st Amendment. Maybe even the very mention of God immediately stops the process of discussion in public schools. But if not, how do you decide when the lecture has turned "religious" and therefore is no longer academic education but religious education.

November 10, 2005 4:38 PM  
Anonymous rexwilder said...

The 9th Circuit is a scary circuit by the way.

But your comment:

I have always been a supporter of public schools, and graduated from one. But when a school presents sexual material to my future son or daughter and tells me to mind my own business, that is a place I can't go.

Isn't that similar to an atheist saying "a place I can't go is when schools are teaching about something that is patently absurd, god" (absurd to the atheist), when I should be handling that at home? If you want creation is schools, what do you say to that person?

I think your point in the final sentence is a good one, and I think the idea of "how do you decide" is why the courts have come down very restrictive on what you can do (no prayer, no bible studies, etc.), because if you start down that path it is tough to know where to stop (from a 1st amendment religious aspect).

Again, none of this has to stay that way if the will of the people is to change the law, but that is (extremely generally) how the law is running right now.

November 10, 2005 5:38 PM  
Blogger The Beast said...

Of course it's not the same. That quote is from a ruling where parents filed a suit against a school for asking their sons and daughters personal sexual questions on a questionaire. The parents lost.

Personal sexual content is a far cry from historical fact. Again, I don't approach God that way, just as fact or academic. But, it seems that schools could approach the subject in that manner, when dealing with an issue like creation, without pursuing the religious angle.

November 10, 2005 6:42 PM  
Anonymous Chao said...

I won't argue any of this but I will post one thing...

"When if comes to the origin of life on this earth, there are only two possibilities: creation or spontaneous generation (evolution). There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved 100 years ago, but that leads us only to one other conclusion: That of supernatural creation. We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds (personal reasons); therefore, we choose to believe the impossible: that life arose spontaneously by chance." - Dr. George Wald, Nobel Peace Prize winner for Science in 1967

Interesting isn't it?

Oh and the 2nd gunmen was ahead and to the left but below the car. He had to fire up to get the head shot reaction. ;)

November 12, 2005 10:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What a great site sugababes upskirt adult comics superheroes credit card gambling bacarat Buick 1966 card licence plate frames Fuel filter replacement gmc yukon 1999 Qualified health insurance Laser fax toner Nevada insurance legal computers in libraries+magazine hardcore anal threesome videos acyclovir anti cellulite product

March 06, 2007 6:20 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home