Wendy you must have been a great teacher. Wendy's model should be followed. Buttars high school teachers failed him.
From: "Wendy Madsen" <WMadsen@icumed.com> Reply-To: Utah Valley Astronomy Association <uvaa@mailman.xmission.com> To: "Utah Valley Astronomy Association" <uvaa@mailman.xmission.com> Subject: RE: [UVAA] OT: Darwin and LDS doctrine Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:20:23 -0700
Wow! I find it interesting that the astronomy list has turned into an evolution debate.
As a former HS biology teacher, I know how uptight people can get about their "religion vs. evolution" ideas. When the question would come up in my classes I would tell students to research it for themselves, talk to their religious leaders and see what they had to say. Most who took the time came back with a better understanding of where their religion stood, and a willingness to learn about and understand evolution.
One of the biggest "mis-educations" that I had to dispel was the idea that evolution = humans came from monkeys. Humans descending from monkeys is like saying that you are the child of your cousin. Sure, you share ancestors, but that DOES NOT mean the human line contains monkeys anywhere (it's not monkeys anyway... It's apes. There's a big difference.)
If a student would persist I would invite them to see me after school/class, if they wanted, and we could talk about it further. If they decided they wanted to take me up on it, we would discuss two things:
1. If your Mom spent the day at home by herself, and when you came home there was a home made cake in the kitchen, what can you infer about who made it? Does that inference tell you the recipe that was used?
The cake in the kitchen and the inferences you can make could be an analogy to the creation story. The recipe, which isn't stated in the bible, is where evolution and all that other scientific "stuff" comes in. It doesn't say "who" but "how".
2. As a person who gets a well rounded high school education, they need to understand the concepts involved with evolution, even if they choose to disagree. They need to be able to discuss intelligently why they are opposed to evolution and be able to defend their opposition with knowledge (unlike Buttars whose lack of understanding is insulting!)
Anyway... That's just my two cents worth.
Wendy Madsen Biological Quality ICU Medical SLC (801)262-2688 ext. 5039
-----Original Message----- From: uvaa-bounces+wendy.madsen=icumed.com@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:uvaa-bounces+wendy.madsen=icumed.com@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Richard Tenney Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 11:45 AM To: Utah Valley Astronomy Association Subject: [UVAA] OT: Darwin and LDS doctrine
I find it interesting Mark, that considering yourself and the biology staff at BYU devout Mormons when embracing Darwin's theory on the origin of man is in direct conflict with LDS church doctrine.
On this point you are flat wrong Steve. The LDS Church (of which I too am an active HP) CONTINUALLY REFUSES TO TAKE A DOCTRINAL POSITION ON HOW HUMANS WERE CREATED. However, commonly held LDS belief that God somehow created humans (completely separate from all other life forms) with a magic wand in a puff of hocus pocus, or from a literal lump of clay is simply pure ignorant superstition (from a literal reading of the creation myth in Genesis/Moses) that flies in the face of mountains of evidence to the contrary. Such a position in fact paints a doctrinal picture in which either God is a capricious, wicked prankster that loves to decieve his curious children, or one in which He is laughing His head off (or shaking it in amazed disbelief) at our gross myopia and willful ignorance of what He has placed here all around us to discover and learn for ourselves.
Can someone please tell me why there are seemingly so many of you (fellow Mormons) that insist that creation == magic?
Why is (creation == evolutionary_process) such a bitter, difficult pill to swallow? I simply do not/cannot understand it.
-Rich
PS, As to any political overtones you might object to, Pres. Bush opening his politically-motivated mouth on the subject of ID is in fact the very ammunition Butters cites to pursue this ridiculous bill of his, and citing that is relevant to such a discussion, unfortunately. So fault him and his fundamentalist "christian" supporters, not folks like Mark that object to what is clearly political hay-making by the president (and one has to believe Buttars, who doesn't have a doctrinal leg to stand on).
Any politician that insists on micro-managing professional science educators should first be forced to pass a basic HS science exam, which Buttars would clearly fail to do.
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________ UVAA mailing list UVAA@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uvaa
_______________________________________________ UVAA mailing list UVAA@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uvaa