Which other creation theories will be taught in public schools?

Question

...if McCain/Palin (pbuh) are elected? Will we finally get ALL sides of the the controversy? Being from Alaska, surely Palin (pbuh) will press for the Inuit creation story too, right? And why is it any less credible than the Biblical version?

Inuit creation theory:

The traditional account of the Inuit people is that the trickster in the form of Raven created the world. When the waters forced the ground up from the deep Raven stabbed it with his beak and fixed it into place. This first land was just big enough for a single house occupied by a single family: a man, his wife and their son, Raven who had fixed the land. The father had a bladder hanging over his bed. After much pleading by Raven the father allowed the boy to play with it. While playing Raven damaged the bladder and light appeared. The father not wanting to have light always shining took the bladder from the boy before he could damage it further. This struggle is the origin of day and night.

Answer 1

I've heard the Inuit creation story before. I like it better than the Christian one though personally I like the Hindu story better - we're all dream matter.

Personally I think that a number of origins theories should be taught. Even if they're not all true (obvisouly all can not be) it truly does NOT hurt to say "different people think different things - here are some other ideas". The problem arises when we discuss where these other theories should be taught, as in, what class.

Oh well, what am I doing answering this question anyways? I'm a Canadian Buddhist!

Answer 2

I've always like this one:

"The Creation myth that unfolds involves Raudra Brahman engaging in coitus with his own daughter; however, the Archer deity (in this early hymn, it is Agni) shoots him and he pulls out at the moment of ejaculation and spills his seed. This leads to the manifest world arising from the spilled seed, the emergence of the manifest realm of multiplicity and form from the unmanifest essential unity."

Answer 3

Palin never supported the teaching of Creationism in public schools.  

Answer 4

Well, we all know Inuit's brains were frozen when they came up with it and the Jews just copied it off of other people who's brains were fried.

Just poking fun, I'm not actually serious :P Well, on the copying part I am, but not the rest.

Answer 5

I have always been fond of ceiling cat and his cheezeburger trees .

Answer 6

they should teach all forms of creation not just the middle eastern version of it

Answer 7

My favorite example evangelical nonsense on the part of Palin is this one: she believes that parents can refuse to let their kids read material in public schools if they find it offensive.

I can see it now....all of the fundamentalist Christians will pull their kids away from the evolution section of their biology texts or their astronomy books that say the earth is 4.5 billion years old.

All of the looney new agers will avoid texts that expose the pseudoscience of astrology or homeopathy. All of the overly concerned health fanatics will protest articles on the efficiency of vaccinations or anti-depressants in the student clinic...and the zealots will stop their children from checking out books from the Harry Potter series, safe s*x, or whatnot.

The potential for abuse under Palin's notion of education is incredibly long. Education really has gone to the dogs, where facts aren't taught unless they are sufficiently popular.

Isn't a school supposed to broaden one's education by exposure to facts and different points of view? Facts are not democratic.

P.S. Palin supports the teaching of intelligent design in public science classes alongside evolution.

Answer 8

wow seriously. the person who made up that inuit story certainly had a vivid imagination. its even funnier than the christian story. :)

i dont think religion should be taught in public school, it is a waste of time and money.  

Answer 9

Technically, intelligent design does not invoke any God or identify any creator - it just gives credence to the existence of one.

I think it is implied that it is the Biblical God - why, I dont know.

Anyways, ID is not science - it won't get in.  

Answer 10

Everyone knows the Flying Spaghetti Monster did it, and planted a bunch of evidence to make it look like we evolved.

Why teach anything else?

Answer 11

Norse Creationism:

There was nothing in the beginning but a seemingly almost endless chasm called the Ginnungagap. Ginnungagap was a void like the Greek Chaos. Ginnungagap was bordered by Niflheim, which is the place of darkness and ice, far to the north; and Muspelheim, a place of fire, far to the south. Out of this chaos the first being came into existence from the drop of water when ice from Niflheim and fire from Muspelheim met.

This first being was Ymir, a primeval giant. The frost-giants called him Aurgelmir, but everyone else called him Ymir. Ymir became father of a race of frost-giants.

Ymir was the father of a six-headed son that was nourished by a cosmic cow called Audumla. Audumla fed herself by l*****g the salty rime-stone, until that stone was licked into a shape of man. This stone-man was named Buri and he was the first primeval god. Buri was the father of Bor.

Bor married the giantess Bestla, the daughter of the frost-giant Boltha. And they became the parents of the first Aesir gods Odin, Vili (Hoenir) and Ve.

Ymir grew so large and so evil that the three gods killed Ymir. The blood that flowed from Ymir's wound was so great that almost all the frost giants drowned in the torrent. Only the frost giants Bergelmer and his wife escaped the flood in a chest, arriving on the mountain of Jötunheim (Jotunheim), which became the home of the giants.

Odin and his brothers then used Ymir's body to create the universe. This universe comprises of nine worlds. They placed the body over the void called Ginnungagap. (end of synopsis)

>>It's time this became part of the public school curriculum.