Tennessee Lawmakers Revive Scary Creationist Bill

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 20, 2012 8:45 PM GMT
    http://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/night-of-the-living-bill-tennessee-lawmakers-revive-dormant-creationism
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14395

    Mar 20, 2012 8:53 PM GMT
    Why am I not shocked by this latest move by Tennessee lawmakers. Because Tennessee is a southern state whose GOP is totally controlled by the narrow minded, bible thumping screwballs. The hateful antics just seem to never end in the South.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 20, 2012 9:05 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob saidWhy am I not shocked by this latest move by Tennessee lawmakers. Because Tennessee is a southern state whose GOP is totally controlled by the narrow minded, bible thumping screwballs. The hateful antics just seem to never end in the South.



    yes Yes YES !!!

    "bible thumping"

    Please Robbie, teach us how .... pretty please.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2012 1:18 AM GMT
    Aw, C'mon guys! The republican bozo that's bringing this crap back is named 'BO'.. yup another republican redneck idiot! 'Bo'.. LMAO Yeah, his parents were real winners!icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Mar 21, 2012 1:24 AM GMT
    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS8d9mlMTjyn3AHlI7iBUP
  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1981

    Mar 21, 2012 5:02 AM GMT
    Conservative Republicans who don't want their children to learn about science should home-school them. I would think even the fundies are getting tired of fighting the same battle for generations.
    Fundies: If you want to check out of society, please go ahead and CHECK OUT or shut up about it. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2012 5:07 AM GMT
    GQjock saidimages?q=tbn:ANd9GcS8d9mlMTjyn3AHlI7iBUP



    Oooooooo......dat's nice! I bet it be cool up in dere yeah. icon_smile.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2012 1:27 PM GMT
    And not a peep from our republicans friends here on RJ.. Hmm, oh so telling!

    http://www.republicansforobama.org/ From the orgs website:Our current Republican leadership is unable to stand up to the most extreme elements in our party, no matter the circumstance.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2012 2:01 PM GMT
    Creationism as science is ridiculous and preposterous... And the West survived and advance for the last couple thousand years in spite of it. It's dumb and retrograde, but it's not "scary".

    40% of Americans think the Bible is the absolute word of God and should be read literally. It would be nice if people could discuss that dynamic reasonably and dispense with the fake horror about a bit of political kabuki that isn't going anywhere.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2012 2:03 PM GMT
    "Watson said the legislation (SB 893 in the Senate) would give guidelines to teachers as they try to answer student questions about evolution, global warming and other subjects, according to the Knoxville News Sentinel. He also said the bill would specify that teachers cannot be punished for answering questions about creationism."

    So with this legislation teachers would not be able to be punished IF they answered a question from a student that involved the word creationism.

    Is this truly the scariest bill you guys have ever seen? I can think of worse.
  • Menergy_1

    Posts: 737

    Mar 21, 2012 2:54 PM GMT
    In what way answering questions about creationism.....like busting out laughing in the students' faces? No punishment -- good! icon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif


    "Watson said the legislation (SB 893 in the Senate) would give guidelines to teachers as they try to answer student questions about evolution, global warming and other subjects, according to the Knoxville News Sentinel. He also said the bill would specify that teachers cannot be punished for answering questions about creationism."


    icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2012 4:50 PM GMT
    Larkin saidCreationism as science is ridiculous and preposterous... And the West survived and advance for the last couple thousand years in spite of it. It's dumb and retrograde, but it's not "scary".

    40% of Americans think the Bible is the absolute word of God and should be read literally. It would be nice if people could discuss that dynamic reasonably and dispense with the fake horror about a bit of political kabuki that isn't going anywhere.




    I personally do find the thought of fundamentalist Christians taking over our schools to be a "scary" thought.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14395

    Mar 24, 2012 2:41 PM GMT
    Creationism is an ancient fairy tale. When are these fundies going to get that through their thick, retarded heads. Probably it is time to herd all the narrow minded, bible thumping screwballs onto special reservations of small land and split their unstable, fundamentalists minds from mainstream American society.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 25, 2012 3:27 AM GMT
    JPtheBITCH saidThe thing about all these really crazy beliefs that are now part of the Republican mainstream is that their sponsors really think that if enacted they would be popular, and that most people will come around to their way of thinking.

    Astounding, like most of the nutty shit that comes out of the right lately.


    I didn't think that the words "Republican" and "mainstream" coexisted together?

    Kind of like "Jumbo Shrimp".
    Little_Jumboshrimp_is_Sleeping-k0nxqt-d.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 25, 2012 3:34 AM GMT
    mocktwinkie said"Watson said the legislation (SB 893 in the Senate) would give guidelines to teachers as they try to answer student questions about evolution, global warming and other subjects, according to the Knoxville News Sentinel. He also said the bill would specify that teachers cannot be punished for answering questions about creationism."

    So with this legislation teachers would not be able to be punished IF they answered a question from a student that involved the word creationism.

    Is this truly the scariest bill you guys have ever seen? I can think of worse.


    Several liberty crushing bills of far worse magnitude have been passed and are now federal law.

    Big whoop, teachers going unpunished for explaining the Great Green Armleseizure to a kid who asks about it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 26, 2012 1:09 AM GMT
    mocktwinkie said"Watson said the legislation (SB 893 in the Senate) would give guidelines to teachers as they try to answer student questions about evolution, global warming and other subjects, according to the Knoxville News Sentinel. He also said the bill would specify that teachers cannot be punished for answering questions about creationism."

    So with this legislation teachers would not be able to be punished IF they answered a question from a student that involved the word creationism.

    Is this truly the scariest bill you guys have ever seen? I can think of worse.


    It is scary in the sense of scientific pedagogy and the future of our country as a leader in the fields of science, technology, and engineering.

    Evolution is the binding theory in biology--it is the glue that holds biology together. Genetics, biotechnology, biochemistry, ecology, molecular biology, marine biology, zoology, virology, microbiology, immunology, and medicine in general (among other fields) are all influenced by evolution. If we want this country to compete with the world we need our children to be properly educated. Genetics and biomedical engineering is the future of biology, and we may be in danger of falling behind Europe, China, and India if science is not taught correctly, or more importantly, respected.

    And it's not just about education. The fact that creationism is even supported by a large sector of society is symptomatic of a larger problem--Americans do not value the scientific method (even though they unknowingly benefit from it every day). Ignorance is rewarded and intellectualism demeaned and distrusted (e.g. the so-called “climategate”).

    You may think this is hyperbolic, but many M.D.s and Ph.D.s are concerned… and rightly so.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 26, 2012 1:10 AM GMT
    Larkin said40% of Americans think the Bible is the absolute word of God and should be read literally. It would be nice if people could discuss that dynamic reasonably and dispense with the fake horror about a bit of political kabuki that isn't going anywhere.


    You have never talked to a fundamentalist before have you?icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 26, 2012 2:03 PM GMT
    conscienti1984 said
    mocktwinkie said"Watson said the legislation (SB 893 in the Senate) would give guidelines to teachers as they try to answer student questions about evolution, global warming and other subjects, according to the Knoxville News Sentinel. He also said the bill would specify that teachers cannot be punished for answering questions about creationism."

    So with this legislation teachers would not be able to be punished IF they answered a question from a student that involved the word creationism.

    Is this truly the scariest bill you guys have ever seen? I can think of worse.


    It is scary in the sense of scientific pedagogy and the future of our country as a leader in the fields of science, technology, and engineering.

    Evolution is the binding theory in biology--it is the glue that holds biology together. Genetics, biotechnology, biochemistry, ecology, molecular biology, marine biology, zoology, virology, microbiology, immunology, and medicine in general (among other fields) are all influenced by evolution. If we want this country to compete with the world we need our children to be properly educated. Genetics and biomedical engineering is the future of biology, and we may be in danger of falling behind Europe, China, and India if science is not taught correctly, or more importantly, respected.

    And it's not just about education. The fact that creationism is even supported by a large sector of society is symptomatic of a larger problem--Americans do not value the scientific method (even though they unknowingly benefit from it every day). Ignorance is rewarded and intellectualism demeaned and distrusted (e.g. the so-called “climategate”).

    You may think this is hyperbolic, but many M.D.s and Ph.D.s are concerned… and rightly so.



    Using the term "evolution", without talking about specifics is so broad though that it doesn't really address anything. If pressed, virtually everyone believes in an ever evolving state of things, or the idea that things change.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 26, 2012 3:46 PM GMT
    conscienti1984 said
    Larkin said40% of Americans think the Bible is the absolute word of God and should be read literally. It would be nice if people could discuss that dynamic reasonably and dispense with the fake horror about a bit of political kabuki that isn't going anywhere.


    You have never talked to a fundamentalist before have you?icon_lol.gif
    Larkin IS a fundamentalist.icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 26, 2012 3:48 PM GMT
    #UnfoundedWorry

    The gatekeepers to the Great Temple of Darwin (post-secondary academia) will prevent heretical, anti-science thought from entering into its hallowed halls.

    A state bill allowing high school teachers to answer questions on creationism will not unseat nearly a century of generally accepted scientific fact established by an overwhelming preponderance of evidence.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 28, 2012 12:34 AM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    conscienti1984 said
    mocktwinkie said"Watson said the legislation (SB 893 in the Senate) would give guidelines to teachers as they try to answer student questions about evolution, global warming and other subjects, according to the Knoxville News Sentinel. He also said the bill would specify that teachers cannot be punished for answering questions about creationism."

    So with this legislation teachers would not be able to be punished IF they answered a question from a student that involved the word creationism.

    Is this truly the scariest bill you guys have ever seen? I can think of worse.


    It is scary in the sense of scientific pedagogy and the future of our country as a leader in the fields of science, technology, and engineering.

    Evolution is the binding theory in biology--it is the glue that holds biology together. Genetics, biotechnology, biochemistry, ecology, molecular biology, marine biology, zoology, virology, microbiology, immunology, and medicine in general (among other fields) are all influenced by evolution. If we want this country to compete with the world we need our children to be properly educated. Genetics and biomedical engineering is the future of biology, and we may be in danger of falling behind Europe, China, and India if science is not taught correctly, or more importantly, respected.

    And it's not just about education. The fact that creationism is even supported by a large sector of society is symptomatic of a larger problem--Americans do not value the scientific method (even though they unknowingly benefit from it every day). Ignorance is rewarded and intellectualism demeaned and distrusted (e.g. the so-called “climategate”).

    You may think this is hyperbolic, but many M.D.s and Ph.D.s are concerned… and rightly so.



    Using the term "evolution", without talking about specifics is so broad though that it doesn't really address anything. If pressed, virtually everyone believes in an ever evolving state of things, or the idea that things change.


    Huh? Um, no not everyone does. Creationists by definition do not believe that species evolve.

    “Creation is the theory that various forms of life began abruptly, with their distinctive features already intact: Fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers and wings, mammals with fur and mammary glands.”

    --Of Pandas and People-- Creationist textbook

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

    And how is evolution in any way broad? Complex, yes... but broad?

    Anyway, evolution is the first step for these fundamentalists--luckily they haven't been as sucessful as they wished... check of "The Wedge" to see their full plan.
    http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.pdf
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_document#cite_note-0
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 28, 2012 1:57 AM GMT
    conscienti1984 said
    mocktwinkie said
    conscienti1984 said
    mocktwinkie said"Watson said the legislation (SB 893 in the Senate) would give guidelines to teachers as they try to answer student questions about evolution, global warming and other subjects, according to the Knoxville News Sentinel. He also said the bill would specify that teachers cannot be punished for answering questions about creationism."

    So with this legislation teachers would not be able to be punished IF they answered a question from a student that involved the word creationism.

    Is this truly the scariest bill you guys have ever seen? I can think of worse.


    It is scary in the sense of scientific pedagogy and the future of our country as a leader in the fields of science, technology, and engineering.

    Evolution is the binding theory in biology--it is the glue that holds biology together. Genetics, biotechnology, biochemistry, ecology, molecular biology, marine biology, zoology, virology, microbiology, immunology, and medicine in general (among other fields) are all influenced by evolution. If we want this country to compete with the world we need our children to be properly educated. Genetics and biomedical engineering is the future of biology, and we may be in danger of falling behind Europe, China, and India if science is not taught correctly, or more importantly, respected.

    And it's not just about education. The fact that creationism is even supported by a large sector of society is symptomatic of a larger problem--Americans do not value the scientific method (even though they unknowingly benefit from it every day). Ignorance is rewarded and intellectualism demeaned and distrusted (e.g. the so-called “climategate”).

    You may think this is hyperbolic, but many M.D.s and Ph.D.s are concerned… and rightly so.



    Using the term "evolution", without talking about specifics is so broad though that it doesn't really address anything. If pressed, virtually everyone believes in an ever evolving state of things, or the idea that things change.


    Huh? Um, no not everyone does. Creationists by definition do not believe that species evolve.

    “Creation is the theory that various forms of life began abruptly, with their distinctive features already intact: Fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers and wings, mammals with fur and mammary glands.”

    --Of Pandas and People-- Creationist textbook

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

    And how is evolution in any way broad? Complex, yes... but broad?

    Anyway, evolution is the first step for these fundamentalists--luckily they haven't been as sucessful as they wished... check of "The Wedge" to see their full plan.
    http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.pdf
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_document#cite_note-0


    Not true. All creationists I know of, unless they are so ignorant that they don't really know how to defend their own position properly, DO believe in evolution (that things change). They believe in genetic variation, which is microevolution -- an empirical scientific fact, not a theory. What they disagree with is amoeba-to-man evolution, which is the driving metaphysical unscientific core of the neo-darwinistic theory of evolution upon which many supporting scientific principles have been attached and hence considered as one package -- blurring the distinction between actual empirical knowledge and a belief system. Creationists, depending on which version is being espoused, do generally believe in survival of the fittest and speciation and many other undisputed scientific facts. Creationists do not accept the wholesale extrapolation idea that because there can be variation in existing genetic pools that somehow entirely different and more advanced data can somehow appear with no scientifically demonstrable mechanism for accomplishing that. We have no scientific reference for the assumed idea that an amoeba has the information to become an elephant, or for a fish to become a tiger. The mechanism allowing for that change and the arrival of completely new information is a fundamentally unscientific idea at this point in time, regardless of how fervent one might actually believe in it. What we do know is that genetic variation can be significant, but the variation seems to always end up, so far, with the final results being confined to a related familial appearance. For instance, there are many types of different ants, but they are all an ant variety based on similarities.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 28, 2012 3:14 AM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    conscienti1984 said
    mocktwinkie said
    conscienti1984 said
    mocktwinkie said"Watson said the legislation (SB 893 in the Senate) would give guidelines to teachers as they try to answer student questions about evolution, global warming and other subjects, according to the Knoxville News Sentinel. He also said the bill would specify that teachers cannot be punished for answering questions about creationism."

    So with this legislation teachers would not be able to be punished IF they answered a question from a student that involved the word creationism.

    Is this truly the scariest bill you guys have ever seen? I can think of worse.


    It is scary in the sense of scientific pedagogy and the future of our country as a leader in the fields of science, technology, and engineering.

    Evolution is the binding theory in biology--it is the glue that holds biology together. Genetics, biotechnology, biochemistry, ecology, molecular biology, marine biology, zoology, virology, microbiology, immunology, and medicine in general (among other fields) are all influenced by evolution. If we want this country to compete with the world we need our children to be properly educated. Genetics and biomedical engineering is the future of biology, and we may be in danger of falling behind Europe, China, and India if science is not taught correctly, or more importantly, respected.

    And it's not just about education. The fact that creationism is even supported by a large sector of society is symptomatic of a larger problem--Americans do not value the scientific method (even though they unknowingly benefit from it every day). Ignorance is rewarded and intellectualism demeaned and distrusted (e.g. the so-called “climategate”).

    You may think this is hyperbolic, but many M.D.s and Ph.D.s are concerned… and rightly so.



    Using the term "evolution", without talking about specifics is so broad though that it doesn't really address anything. If pressed, virtually everyone believes in an ever evolving state of things, or the idea that things change.


    Huh? Um, no not everyone does. Creationists by definition do not believe that species evolve.

    “Creation is the theory that various forms of life began abruptly, with their distinctive features already intact: Fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers and wings, mammals with fur and mammary glands.”

    --Of Pandas and People-- Creationist textbook

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

    And how is evolution in any way broad? Complex, yes... but broad?

    Anyway, evolution is the first step for these fundamentalists--luckily they haven't been as sucessful as they wished... check of "The Wedge" to see their full plan.
    http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.pdf
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_document#cite_note-0


    Not true. All creationists I know of, unless they are so ignorant that they don't really know how to defend their own position properly, DO believe in evolution (that things change). They believe in genetic variation, which is microevolution -- an empirical scientific fact, not a theory. What they disagree with is amoeba-to-man evolution, which is the driving metaphysical unscientific core of the neo-darwinistic theory of evolution upon which many supporting scientific principles have been attached and hence considered as one package -- blurring the distinction between actual empirical knowledge and a belief system. Creationists, depending on which version is being espoused, do generally believe in survival of the fittest and speciation and many other undisputed scientific facts. Creationists do not accept the wholesale extrapolation idea that because there can be variation in existing genetic pools that somehow entirely different and more advanced data can somehow appear with no scientifically demonstrable mechanism for accomplishing that. We have no scientific reference for the assumed idea that an amoeba has the information to become an elephant, or for a fish to become a tiger. The mechanism allowing for that change and the arrival of completely new information is a fundamentally unscientific idea at this point in time, regardless of how fervent one might actually believe in it. What we do know is that genetic variation can be significant, but the variation seems to always end up, so far, with the final results being confined to a related familial appearance. For instance, there are many types of different ants, but they are all an ant variety based on similarities.


    Did you go to college? If yes, were you a science major or have you ever studied science subjects (biology for example) are university level? (I seriously do not mean to insult you with this inquiry—I’m merely curious.) I ask because you have some misconceptions about the scientific method, philosophy of science, and evolutionary theory in general. There are a lot of errors in what you wrote and you misused the term "theory"--your definition was colloquial not scientific.

    That said there are variations of creationists: young earth creationist, old earth creationists, and then those believing in "intelligent design" who are separate. Young Earthers are the most extreme--they believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old.

    Those who support "intelligent design” are different--they do not refer themselves as creationists (mainly for political and legal reasons). You are describing intelligent designers--they generally accept microevolution and not macroevolution (btw: speciation is the bridge between the two which creationists and most intelligent designers reject.)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 28, 2012 2:09 PM GMT
    conscientiDid you go to college? If yes, were you a science major or have you ever studied science subjects (biology for example) are university level? (I seriously do not mean to insult you with this inquiry—I’m merely curious.) I ask because you have some misconceptions about the scientific method, philosophy of science, and evolutionary theory in general. There are a lot of errors in what you wrote and you misused the term "theory"--your definition was colloquial not scientific.

    That said there are variations of creationists: young earth creationist, old earth creationists, and then those believing in "intelligent design" who are separate. Young Earthers are the most extreme--they believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old.

    Those who support "intelligent design” are different--they do not refer themselves as creationists (mainly for political and legal reasons). You are describing intelligent designers--they generally accept microevolution and not macroevolution (btw: speciation is the bridge between the two which creationists and most intelligent designers reject.)


    You're more than welcome to point out my "misconceptions" of the "scientific method", the "philosophy of science" and the "evolutionary theory" in general. Not that I see how this is relevant but I actually did pretty well in science throughout K-12 (pretty basic and rudimentary) but most of my knowledge on the subject came from from an early and ongoing interest in both earth biology and cosmology as a hobby--I did not take a Biology course in college because it was not going to be a career focus. Nevertheless, the subject became somewhat of an obsession of mine until I continued to focus on my other studies. That being said, I feel that understanding both sides of an argument is more important than having an exclusive knowledge of one. Taking classes is one thing, retaining knowledge and a handle on the subject is another. I am not dogmatic about any belief myself in a capacity where I will pretend to be able to defend it outside a spiritually persuaded realm and generally lean towards the convenient "I don't know" platform if pressed to the hilt. It seems to work for Bill Maher pretty well.

    To address a few things you said. All creationists actually adhere to "intelligent design", but it is true that not all people who believe in "intelligent design" adhere to the specific versions of creation generally accepted by the majority of creationists (the most vocal of which happen to be rooted in Christianity).

    Contrary to popular thought, most biblical creationists rely on speciation in order to support their ideas which need to overcome the impossibility of so many different species of animals being able to fit on Noah's Ark. In fact, they rely on rapid speciation for this to occur. Creationists have another category called "kind" to differentiate from "species", but one of the main problems facing creationists is that they don't have a clear cut criteria for determining how a "kind" differs from a "species", although they insist that they are different and that species may become other species but kinds may never become another kind. Nevertheless, they believe that there were basic original "kinds" for all of the different species we have today. So for example, one basic kind of "dog" pair and a basic type of "cat" type and a basic "ant" type, etc etc etc. Although they haven't been able to put together a criteria for kind, a different "kind" in their eyes would be a fish from a mammal.

    I did not misuse the term theory. A theory consists of a series of hypotheses that have individually or jointly received some kind of scientifically observable corroboration. In order for a scientific theory to elevate to the level of scientific knowledge or fact the entire package must be able to have met full scientific ratification and scrutiny. The neo-darwinistic theory of evolution cannot, in its full entirety, be looked at as a fact yet. Attaching innumerable scientific truths to a core philosophy does not automatically answer veritably all of the predictions and conclusions inherent within. Refer to my previous examples asking for a mechanism for amoeba-to-man changes.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 28, 2012 4:19 PM GMT
    I don't buy a lot of the bible stories about how we came about, and neither do I buy into some theory that I came from some worm that crawled out of the muck and over millions of years became the complicated thinking, reasoning and highly functional human animal that we now are.

    At my age I've accepted that I won't be able to know or figure out all that I see and am. I am very comfortable with all the unknown misteries about human life and this worlds origination and won't waste my time having to lay claim to some theory as the 'perfect truth' behind why we exist and are here on this particular planet.

    I don't care how I came about, I'm just happy to be here and that you all are here too. However, I have learned through much reading of history that world religions and their dogma when mixed with the state and its educational systems have brought about loss of freedoms for the masses nearly everytime.

    Keep your bible and your version of god out of our schools, there's enough ignorance amongst the Tennessee and southern public without further dumbing them down by infiltrating ignorant interpretations of bible stories into our schools.

    One example of such ignorant Bible story theory teachings and adherence is the fundi's biblical backing of theft of land from indiginous people in the West Bank. Look at all the problems that is causing for the world. And that is from just what is taught at Sunday School, imagine how hard it would be to cut through an increased level of ignorance if such bullshit were taught our children 5 days a week and on Sunday too !!