"You know that's impossible right?" Explaining to kids the comments of creationists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First of all, wait until they walk away. That's the polite thing to do. Then explain what you think but also your fair interpretation of what the woman thinks. Tell your kids that there are different opinions and beliefs about all sorts of things and encourage them to research something they want to know about and make a decision based on that.

I don't know. That comes close to lending creationism validity, and creationist theory isn't valid.

And do you immediately debunk Santa Claus when someone references him? Different people have different faith beliefs. You might believe they are wrong, but it's pretty darn bigoted to openly write them off to your kids without some sort of "this is what some people believe, this is what we believe" approach.

Um, no. I don't "believe" they are wrong. I know they are wrong because scientific evidence proves it.

But I do agree that creationism has a lot in common with the childhood fantasy/myth of Santa Claus. The difference is, faith in Santa Claus never hurt anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Some people believe in old fashioned opinions and some believe in things supported by scientific evidence. Whatever the case, we need to respect their opinions and get along. Even if they don't respect ours, we'll try to take the high road."

But that's just it, we don't need to respect their opinions. And I don't think teaching children they should have respect for that opinion is smart. You don't need to openly mock it -- the pp who said that is correct. But, no, I wouldn't lend any credibility to that view when explaining the facts to my own children. I certainly wouldn't present the creationism perspective in a neutral way.

[Anonymous]

And creationists disagree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Some people believe in old fashioned opinions and some believe in things supported by scientific evidence. Whatever the case, we need to respect their opinions and get along. Even if they don't respect ours, we'll try to take the high road."

But that's just it, we don't need to respect their opinions. And I don't think teaching children they should have respect for that opinion is smart. You don't need to openly mock it -- the pp who said that is correct. But, no, I wouldn't lend any credibility to that view when explaining the facts to my own children. I certainly wouldn't present the creationism perspective in a neutral way.

Ugh, and your children will be as insufferable and intolerant as you. Awesome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would have said to my kids that Christians believe the universe was created in seven days, but that is a religious story and science says the universe is about 13.5 billion years old, and I would have added that our family considers science (which is based on observable facts) to be better at answering questions about the world/universe than science. I wouldn't have waited until the woman walked away, but I wouldn't have spoken so that she and her family could necessarily hear me.

We're a multicultural family -- I was raised Christian and became an atheist, DH is from another culture that is largely atheistic but has cultural religious beliefs nonetheless.

I like this answer. It's better than "Those people believe X, others believe Y, go forth and do your own research and decide which you believe." You have a duty to debunk X right away when talking to your children. You need not do it obnoxiously in front of the other family -- no purpose can be served there. But you also need not be hushed about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Some people believe in old fashioned opinions and some believe in things supported by scientific evidence. Whatever the case, we need to respect their opinions and get along. Even if they don't respect ours, we'll try to take the high road."

But that's just it, we don't need to respect their opinions. And I don't think teaching children they should have respect for that opinion is smart. You don't need to openly mock it -- the pp who said that is correct. But, no, I wouldn't lend any credibility to that view when explaining the facts to my own children. I certainly wouldn't present the creationism perspective in a neutral way.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Some people believe in old fashioned opinions and some believe in things supported by scientific evidence. Whatever the case, we need to respect their opinions and get along. Even if they don't respect ours, we'll try to take the high road."

But that's just it, we don't need to respect their opinions. And I don't think teaching children they should have respect for that opinion is smart. You don't need to openly mock it -- the pp who said that is correct. But, no, I wouldn't lend any credibility to that view when explaining the facts to my own children. I certainly wouldn't present the creationism perspective in a neutral way.

Ugh, and your children will be as insufferable and intolerant as you. Awesome.

We're supposed to tolerate creationism? I didn't get that memo. Why does anyone have to tolerate creationism? It's not a valid view. It's demonstrably false. Do I have to tolerate you if you run around insisting the sky is orange because your deity says it is, even though I can with my own eyes that it's blue? This has nothing to do with "tolerance."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Some people believe in old fashioned opinions and some believe in things supported by scientific evidence. Whatever the case, we need to respect their opinions and get along. Even if they don't respect ours, we'll try to take the high road."

But that's just it, we don't need to respect their opinions. And I don't think teaching children they should have respect for that opinion is smart. You don't need to openly mock it -- the pp who said that is correct. But, no, I wouldn't lend any credibility to that view when explaining the facts to my own children. I certainly wouldn't present the creationism perspective in a neutral way.

I am not a creationist but you do realize that in a sense, you acting exactly as the woman the OP described. Since you don't believe, it can't possibly true. I think that children should be able to research what interests them and what they are curious about and make their own decisions. Which, as I stated earlier, is what they are going to do anyway. Odds are the woman described by the OP doesn't think being gay is natural either. Do you think that automatically that none of her children are gay? Probably not, but if one of them is, they will be much more likely to hide it. I am raising my children, I decide the rules while they live in my house but I do not own their brains and I want them to be free thinkers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And creationists disagree.

That doesn't mean that viewpoint is worthy of respect or deference of any sort. It's not something you agree to disagree over.

[Anonymous]

Yep. You should like a wonderful person who will raise wonderful close-minded children. Let me guess-- Democrstic voter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Some people believe in old fashioned opinions and some believe in things supported by scientific evidence. Whatever the case, we need to respect their opinions and get along. Even if they don't respect ours, we'll try to take the high road."

But that's just it, we don't need to respect their opinions. And I don't think teaching children they should have respect for that opinion is smart. You don't need to openly mock it -- the pp who said that is correct. But, no, I wouldn't lend any credibility to that view when explaining the facts to my own children. I certainly wouldn't present the creationism perspective in a neutral way.

I am not a creationist but you do realize that in a sense, you acting exactly as the woman the OP described. Since you don't believe, it can't possibly true. I think that children should be able to research what interests them and what they are curious about and make their own decisions. Which, as I stated earlier, is what they are going to do anyway. Odds are the woman described by the OP doesn't think being gay is natural either. Do you think that automatically that none of her children are gay? Probably not, but if one of them is, they will be much more likely to hide it. I am raising my children, I decide the rules while they live in my house but I do not own their brains and I want them to be free thinkers.

Bad analogy. I can prove creationism is false. I cannot prove being gay is natural.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yep. You should like a wonderful person who will raise wonderful close-minded children. Let me guess-- Democrstic voter?

Honey. It's the creationists who are close-minded. Telling my children they are fools and here is why doesn't make me close-minded.

I'm a Democrat. I'm also a Christian. I'm also a rational thinker. Also, I ride horses. So, what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And creationists disagree.

That doesn't mean that viewpoint is worthy of respect or deference of any sort. It's not something you agree to disagree over.

So you teach your kids to disrespect any viewpoint that differs from yours? I just thought we were way past this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yep. You should like a wonderful person who will raise wonderful close-minded children. Let me guess-- Democrstic voter?

Honey. It's the creationists who are close-minded. Telling my children they are fools and here is why doesn't make me close-minded.

I'm a Democrat. I'm also a Christian. I'm also a rational thinker. Also, I ride horses. So, what?

I hope you don't teach your kids that there's a God. Because there's no scientific proof to back that up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And creationists disagree.

That doesn't mean that viewpoint is worthy of respect or deference of any sort. It's not something you agree to disagree over.

So you teach your kids to disrespect any viewpoint that differs from yours? I just thought we were way past this.

Not at all, but some things can be dismissed immediately as demonstrably false. If you tell me a cat is a dog, and I can see it's a dog, I don't have to respect your viewpoint just because you have it.

There should be no viewpoints in this case. The facts are indisputable. This is not a question of interpretation -- it is a matter of fact. Creationists "believe" something that's contrary to demonstrable fact. So, no, their "beliefs" aren't valid because I can prove them wrong, dispassionately.

Similarly, do I have to respect the viewpoint of people who think George W. Bush orchestrated 9-11? Because that's what you're arguing.