Home » Off Topic » Words “Intelligent” and “Design” Can’t Be Used Together in K-12

Words “Intelligent” and “Design” Can’t Be Used Together in K-12

The words intelligent and design are banned when used together in public schools. What other words are the modern day censors trying to ban when used together you might ask. Warning: You probably won’t want to know. But if you do

BRAVE NEW SCHOOLS
Ban on ‘mom’ and ‘dad’ considered – again
California agenda would require K-12 ‘gay’ indoctrination

HT to FTK at Reasonable Kansans.

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

17 Responses to Words “Intelligent” and “Design” Can’t Be Used Together in K-12

  1. If they banned “eat me” they would have to rid the schools of “Alice in Wonderland”.

  2. Makes me sick to my stomach…

    Looks like our country will be down the tubes in 50 years

  3. 3

    That’s why should I be blessed with children one day I’m home-schooling them. There’s just too many stupid rules that violate a child’s First Amendment rights and violate a parent’s right to raise their child in an ethical, nonpostmodern way (no moral relativism).

  4. UrbanMysticDee,

    May you have a thousand healthy babies who grow to have a thousand each.

  5. “Gender-neutral bathrooms could be required for those confused about their gender identity.”

    And we’ll have a lot more of those if this goes through.

  6. Gender neutral everything huh?

    This proves that if you teach people that they are mere animals they will end up acting worse than animals.

    Nature is not gender neutral. Never will be.

    The inane drones that produce this kind of “legislation” ought to be put out to pasture on some maximum security “funny farm”.

    Personally I’m so sick & tired of “gays” and their disgusting agenda for the rest of us.

    They cannot reproduce themselves, thus they do what they can to “convert” you, your wife and your kids to their image, in their likeness.

    Like the men of Sodom, they wish you to become a partner (and target) in perversion.

    This legislative effort is nothing less than mass indoctrination & proselytism. Another major effort to confuse and abuse you. They are planning the same interventions in Canada as well.

    If we all were to go gay tomorrow the human race would be extinct in less than a century.

    Calling homosexuals “gay” (happy, joyful) is like calling a defective old Lada a luxury automobile. They are the most unhappy people on Earth.

    Next on the agenda? Legalized bestiality, incest and pedophilia. Just a question of time – like the “boiled frog” syndrome – they bring it on slowly, little by little without our immediate awareness til we are all nicely boiled and ready for spoil.

    Time for a national spiritual awakening or goodbye USA and Canada. Time to get rid of Darwinism, post-modern clap-trap and their ravaging consequences on human life and morals.

  7. “Next on the agenda? Legalized bestiality, incest and pedophilia.”

    The Dutch are on their way…

    Check it out:

    Dutch will allow paedophile group

    A Dutch court has turned down a request to ban a political party with a paedophile agenda.

    Judge HFM Hofhuis ruled that the Brotherly Love, Freedom and Diversity Party (PNVD) had the same right to exist as any other political party.

    The PNVD was formed by three paedophiles in May, prompting outrage in Dutch society. It seeks to lower the age of sexual consent from 16 to 12 and legalise child pornography and sex with animals. “Freedom of expression…including the freedom to set up a political party can be seen as the basis for a democratic society,” Judge Hofhuis said in the ruling, according to the Associated Press news agency.

  8. jpark320 wrote:
    “Looks like our country will be down the tubes in 50 years”

    Wow, an optimist! I give it 25-30. The way I figure it, at soon as the new atheist movement successfully removes everything “God” from our society we’re done for. No more superpower – just an extension of Europe with guys like Dawkins worshiped as gods.

  9. I wish I could say the U.S. is far from the point where Holland is, but I can’t. To steer the thread back a little more towards science and academia, here are some relevant links:

    Children, the Next Sexual Frontier. (Here is a Wikipedia link about the book mentioned in the article)

    A meta-analytic examination of assumed properties of child sexual abuse using college samples. (abstract; basically states pedophilia does no harm to children per se, but social stigma surrounding pedophilia being taboo does) (full study in PDF form)

    Professor Harris G. Mirkin, one of the academic leaders in the American pro-pedophilia movement.

    No Opting Out of Gay Reeducation.

    Canadian Professor Opposes Raising Age of Consent to 16.

    Policy “Perversions”: Depo-Provera and John Money’s New Sexual Order. (peer-reviewed article describes pedophiles as “sexual minorities” who are being unjustly repressed)

    Judge orders ‘gay’ agenda
    taught to Christian children.

    District gags 14-year-olds after ‘gay’ indoctrination.

    Interspecies Sex: Evolution’s Hidden Secret? (Ever wonder how humans can evolve past our current evolutionary stagnation? Wonder no more!)

    For fun, here’s a little political action thrown in from Huffington Post – Sex in Sixth Grade? OK in My Book.

    Hope these links come through, the preview looks a little wonky.

  10. While I’m inclined to agree with many of the comments made so far, a quick scan of both of the attached articles revealed that neither had anything to say about intelligent design or whether the words can be “used together in public schools.” Was this just an inference, or did I miss something?

  11. Forthekids: Thanks for the link.

    My biggest surprise? “prompting outrage in Dutch society”!! Go figure. They legalize everything else but are still unknowingly clinging to Christian morals with regards to children!?

    Just superficial sentiment when you consider their record. The fastest way to get thrown in jail over there is to speak publicly against homos etc..

    “says its aim is to break taboos and fight intolerance.” HA! I knew it, the infamous word is always used – “intolerance”

  12. shaner74: “…we’re done for. No more superpower – just an extension of Europe with guys like Dawkins worshiped as gods.”

    Maybe we’re already done for! WWIII is just around the corner and we all feel it.

    Historically speaking every nation that has gone the way of Sodom ends up wiped off the map sooner or later.

    Or, there is a spiritual awakening that curbs the tide of decadence and puts off the downfall til later.

    Usually takes a lot more than a few decades though. But then we’ve already had more than a few decades.

    Egypt, Babylon, Assyria, Greece, Rome… all there in the history books – always the same pattern.

    Jer. 18 “Whenever I say anything about uprooting a nation or a kingdom, and smashing it and sending destruction on it;
    If, in that very minute, that nation of which I was talking is turned away from its evil, my purpose of doing evil to them will be changed.
    And whenever I say anything about building up a nation or a kingdom, and planting it;
    If, in that very minute, it does evil in my eyes, going against my orders, then my good purpose, which I said I would do for them, will be changed.”

    Sound familiar? I’d say we’re easily situated somewhere in that 2nd section.

    America has mocked God, gone against all good moral sense, abandoned it’s roots, allowed atheist jackasses to run the country and has basically told God to go to hell.

    And, Islam is taking over Europe, and North Am politics is still letting them invade us… one family of immigrants at a time – who then reproduce, become area majorities, take over and then start the Jihad on a more aggressive basis right here in America.

    The French have certainly been going through it. Britain is tasting it and America is still reeling from 911.

    Yet we still let them in because of this asinine form of “tolerance” of anything at all, to the point of letting our sworn enemies move in next door! How’s that for stupid?!

    Europe (eventually Eurabia) is already down the tubes, imo.

    Dawkins and cie. will be just another terrorist target for “convert or we’ll cut your head off” tactics. And seeing that he’s a poor atheist who’s already lost his head (in a different sense), has spoken against God extensively and has “no ultimate foundation for ethics”…what are his chances?

    Our forefathers would vomit and blush in shame if they could see what is going on and getting passed off as tolerance these days.

    We don’t because we are like the boiling frog – getting used to it slowly…

    A very sorry picture is painting itself across the globe. And this is exactly what the secular humanists want!

    God help us.

  13. Isn’t it ironic that people ask for proof of a higher driving force, yet seem to dismiss it as psuedoscience the first chance they get? They belittle the position instead of a factual dialouge, because in their mindset it simply isn’t possible. Skepticism is becoming analgous to pushing one’s own agenda- what happened to good ol’ fashioned inquiry.

    As for the world, it doesn’t take anyone special to see the world is going down the toliet, with such arguments as “it happens in nature, so I can do it too.” Yea, mothers eat their children in the wild, let’s see that become a standard. Of course, if you dare disagree with anyone’s position you are a bigot, and if they disagree with you- then you are just an idiot. Now, I have no problems with homosexuals- but grade school is not a place to educate the youth- people need to decide on their own. Schools are not a place for morals- but for education.

    To add, sanctity of life is meaningless to poeple today, yet many argue it is the fetus’ only chance at life. Ironic how many atheists support abortion, when I think it should be vice versa. But then again, I don’t think I actually view a fetus as merely a protein sack.

    As for Dawkins, he will never change his position on materialism- he has become too much of a celebrity for it, and he loves being in the limelight. Unfortunately, he is becoming the religious bigot he abhors- he doesn’t see it possible to be religious and a scientist- ironic how he comes full circle to a stereotypical fundamentalist nut. He has too much to lose now.

    I don’t know if there is anything beyond what I see, but too simply dismiss it is preposterous. The idea that the universe is wholly rational cannot be supported by a materialist, nor does the apparent guiding force in evolution seem to dictate a paradigm of survival of the fittest. It seems to give credance that fittest is already defined. The more I think of convergant evolution, the more it seems like it actually supports a designer point of view.

    Sorry to rant, but it still seems like a lot of arguments boil down to the same old arguments. There really is nothing new under the sun.

  14. SteveB @ 9

    Try checking the bottom of DaveScot’s blog entry:

    “This entry was posted Sunday, April 29th, 2007 at 4:57 pm and is filed under Off Topic.”

  15. Angryoldfatman:
    I understand that the bottom says that it’s off-topic. But the top says “Words “Intelligent” and “Design” Can’t Be Used Together in K-12,” which lead me to believe–crazy idea, I know–that the referenced articles might have had something to say about ID. I guess not.

  16. bork, you said:

    [Dawkins] he doesn’t see it possible to be religious and a scientist

    bork, meet Richard Dawkins. The God Delusion, p. 99:

    Great scientists who profess religion become harder to find through the twentieth century, but they are not particularly rare. I suspect that most of the more recent ones are religious only in the Einsteinian sense which, I argued in Chapter 1, is a misuse of the word. Nevertheless, there are some genuine specimens of good scientists who are sincerely religious in the full, traditional sense.

    While he may argue that religious scientists don’t turn the full fire of their skeptical toolkit on their religious belief, I’ve yet to see him argue that religious people are incapable of rationality, or of skepticism.

  17. How does one fight intolerance without being intolerant?

Leave a Reply