Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Don't Stay In School

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Stripe View Post
    Easy, as always with you.

    Parents are a better option than random strangers.
    Teachers do not usually fall under the heading of "random strangers". Your reasoning is abysmal.

    Comment


    • #17
      More often than not, they do.

      And parents are a better option than the best-trained teachers.
      Where is the evidence for a global flood?
      E≈mc2
      "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

      "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
      -Bob B.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Stripe View Post
        More often than not, they do.

        And parents are a better option than the best-trained teachers.
        Well, unless you want your children to really learn something.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Jonahdog View Post
          Well, unless you want your children to really learn something.
          Parents are the best bet.
          Where is the evidence for a global flood?
          E≈mc2
          "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

          "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
          -Bob B.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Stripe View Post
            Parents are the best bet.
            Wrong.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Jonahdog View Post
              Wrong.
              True, in fact. Children respond to stability, discipline and attention. In the schools, you get disruption, chaos and an employee running around after 30 kids. Heck, I used to teach classes of 60.

              Parents are the best bet.
              Where is the evidence for a global flood?
              E≈mc2
              "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

              "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
              -Bob B.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Stripe View Post
                True, in fact. Children respond to stability, discipline and attention. In the schools, you get disruption, chaos and an employee running around after 30 kids. Heck, I used to teach classes of 60.

                Parents are the best bet.
                Children also need substance in their education. If you have a parent or a set of parents who do not need to work but can teach science, language, math, social studies etc. Then perhaps it would work. But most parents have neither the time nor the background to be appropriate teachers
                Unless of course, you are satisfied with indoctrinating your children to be religious fundamentalists. I suspect you would be content with that.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Jonahdog View Post
                  Children also need substance in their education. If you have a parent or a set of parents who do not need to work but can teach science, language, math, social studies etc. Then perhaps it would work. But most parents have neither the time nor the background to be appropriate teachers.
                  If you're not willing to raise your kids, you shouldn't have them.

                  Unless of course, you are satisfied with indoctrinating your children to be religious fundamentalists. I suspect you would be content with that.
                  And you're content with kids being indoctrinated with godlessness and evolution.
                  Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                  E≈mc2
                  "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                  "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                  -Bob B.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Stripe View Post
                    If you're not willing to raise your kids, you shouldn't have them.

                    And you're content with kids being indoctrinated with godlessness and evolution.
                    Raised 4, all grown to be responsible adults and smart enough to have rejected your god and to accept the real world, which includes, by definition, evolution.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Jonahdog View Post
                      Raised 4, all grown to be responsible adults and smart enough to have rejected your god and to accept the real world, which includes, by definition, evolution.
                      Nope. Evolution is just a theory.

                      And you didn't raise them; you sent them off to random strangers to do all your heavy lifting.
                      Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                      E≈mc2
                      "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                      "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                      -Bob B.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Stripe View Post
                        Nope. Evolution is just a theory.

                        And you didn't raise them; you sent them off to random strangers to do all your heavy lifting.
                        Yep, a theory as opposed to the myth of creationism. I've been around here long enough to believe you know what a theory means to science. Your use of the term suggests theory means a guess. Another bit of misrepresentation by Stripe, who must think that a knowing misrepresentation is not equal to a lie, or that it is OK to lie for Jesus.

                        Without knowing my children, my wife or me your last comment is presumptuous and ignorant at the same time.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Jonahdog View Post
                          Yep, a theory.
                          As opposed to a definitional part of reality.

                          Your use of the term suggests theory means a guess.
                          That's just your insecurity at play.

                          Without knowing my children, my wife or me your last comment is presumptuous and ignorant at the same time.
                          You did send them to school, right?
                          Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                          E≈mc2
                          "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                          "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                          -Bob B.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Stripe View Post
                            As opposed to a definitional part of reality.

                            That's just your insecurity at play.



                            You did send them to school, right?
                            My insecurity? Yet you run your life based on myth of a god who will punish you forever if you do not believe as required. Your fear of picking the wrong side must be overwhelming. Interferes with rational thought.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Jonahdog View Post
                              My insecurity?
                              Yep. You declare evolution a fact then when called on it, you pretend the other guy has gotten something wrong.

                              You run your life based on myth of a god who will punish you forever if you do not believe as required.
                              Nope. Everyone will face judgement for what they have done to the same extent regardless of what they believe.

                              Your fear of picking the wrong side must be overwhelming. Interferes with rational thought.
                              Pascal's wager applies in this situation. If I'm wrong, big deal.

                              But if you're wrong...
                              Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                              E≈mc2
                              "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                              "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                              -Bob B.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Stripe View Post

                                Pascal's wager applies in this situation. If I'm wrong, big deal.

                                But if you're wrong...
                                If you are wrong you have lived your life in unnecessary fear rather than embracing the way it is. Your loss.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X