Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

3 Bumps

Why do these idiots keep getting re-elected?

After creationism bill failed, Indiana senator will push 'truth in education' measure


He tried to force creationism into curriculum last year, and failed.  This year he wants teachers to be required to "prove" anything they teach.  If a student questions anything in any class, the teacher must be able to provide some sort of proof (like, say, a science book?)

1) an example of another complete moron who does not understand the definition of the phrase "scientific theory"  (here's a hint - it does NOT mean something not proven.  It is a collection of facts which support a claim)

2) an example of another complete moron who does not understand the definition of not making any law regarding the establishment of religion.

But I'm guessing he'd count the Bible as a valid source of fact if anyone wanted to teach creationism?

Answer Question

Asked by NotPanicking at 8:46 AM on Dec. 5, 2012 in Politics & Current Events

Level 51 (421,174 Credits)
Answers (39)
  • I would think the bible would be the only source anyone would have to prove creationism. I think he could spend his effort saving lost souls instead of trying to muddle the minds of children, I am glad I live in Jersey and not Indiana, lol!

    Answer by jerseydiva at 9:05 AM on Dec. 5, 2012

  • Because sadly enough people believe in that crap to vote him into office.

    Answer by 3libras at 9:20 AM on Dec. 5, 2012

  • What gets me is how long I, personally, have been fighting this fight against creationism in school. My oldest is 30 and I was having to bump heads with school boards administrators when she was in high school.

    It's like a weed that keeps being squashed in one place, only to return in another. And like Libras said, there are so many people who support this idea that religion belongs in a science class that they will continue to bring these people back into office.

    I'll tell you what's scary though; there seem to be many MORE politicians that loudly espouse the ideology than there were 15 years ago

    Answer by Mrs_Prissy at 9:29 AM on Dec. 5, 2012

  • So just because it says so in a science book makes it true?

    My guess as to why these ppl keep getting re-elected is that their actions reflect their constituancy's values.

    Answer by HHx5 at 9:30 AM on Dec. 5, 2012

  • "So just because it says so in a science book makes it true?"

    Ummm... wow. I want to respond to this somehow, but it seems like a waste of time really. I mean come on now....

    Idk how people like this guy get elected in the first place, let alone get themselves re-elected. I guess there are just that many idiots out there voting for them (who knows why).

    Answer by anime_mom619 at 11:10 AM on Dec. 5, 2012

  • I don't agree with calling people idiots because they have certain convictions.

    Answer by HHx5 at 11:27 AM on Dec. 5, 2012

  • They are idiots if they have no idea what exactly they are voting for. It has nothing to do with convictions (religious or not). If these politicians are thinking they can just stomp all over separation of church and state and attempt in subtle ways to establish one religion in this country (and that's what these people are trying to do), then the people who vote for them are either extremists (like the politician), or more likely they don't have any idea what they are truly voting for. If it is the latter case, then yes, they are idiots plain and simple, end of story.

    Another example... there are many people I know who voted for Obama not once, but twice... just because they think he's cool. That my friend, is an idiot. It's really no different than what I was trying to say in this case.

    Answer by anime_mom619 at 11:53 AM on Dec. 5, 2012

  • That's my point! By calling someone an idiot, you are calling them stupid and incapable of learning. You are assuming creationists are stupid. I'm assuming evolutionists are ignorant.

    Texts books are not the be all and end all of the science class room. Some teach global warming. Any body still buying that? If people can calm down for a moment after hearing the shocking suggestion of the "C" word (ah hum, creationism) you might see that religion need not be brought up at all other than the possibility of acknowledging a Creator. Science class doesn't even have to mention the Genesis story. How about just teaching truth, as in, "This is what we know (observational science), here's what we think probably happened (historical science) and why and here's the problems with that.

    Answer by HHx5 at 12:12 PM on Dec. 5, 2012

  • "This is what we know (observational science), here's what we think probably happened (historical science) and why and here's the problems with that."

    that IS whats taught (except for the "problems" part b/c the only problems are ppl who think evolution is out to disprove God), only there are many idiots, yes idiots, out there who get pissy about it b/c they think scientists are out to make the world disbelieve in God. i know these ppl personally. shoot, you cant even use the word evolution in a non-science capacity without them freaking out.

    what i dont get is that he's already failed once... obviously, its not wanted. so why is he wasting timehe should be helping his state by trying to push thru something thats already failed? hell, i can prove just about anything if im allowed to use any book in print...say that the moon is made of cheese or that the moon landing was faked. yay for "proof"!

    Answer by okmanders at 12:53 PM on Dec. 5, 2012

  • The definition of 'idiot' is a senseless or foolish person. If someone is unwilling to learn everything about a candidate (regardless of that candidate's religious beliefs or lack thereof), and yet they still vote for them because they're cool, or they're the same religion, etc, then I'm sorry but they are stupid/senseless/foolish. I would consider myself an idiot for doing such a thing.

    HHx5, what you are suggesting is material for a Philosophy class. The idea of a Creator is an abstract concept. That is something that has a place in a class which discusses those things. I have no problem teaching such ideas, I just think that scientific theory has a place in a science classroom, and abstract concepts can be taught in a philosophy/humanities class. And textbooks should be used on conjunction with other resources when teaching. Hell, my kids' middle school doesn't even use textbooks.

    Answer by anime_mom619 at 1:32 PM on Dec. 5, 2012

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.