This must be in some way a response to the article on being sacked for teaching evolution in the previous thread- same journalist etc… at least some sense and perspective on the issue…
http://www.news24.com/SciTech/News/Anti-evolution-equals-apartheid-20120309
Well, they have a point, I remember quite vividly being taught that people with a darker skintone didnt have the same mental capacity and that their brains looked different to ours. I also remember walking a wide circle around poor Tanya who happened to walk around with a really, really dark tan all year through. In case she was catching.
The article is a complete failure of logic due to a fixation on apartheid.
If A removes B, and C reinstates B, that does not mean that removing B again makes you A.
There are plenty of groups around the world that are opposed to evolution, all due to religious dogma as far as I am aware, and that does not make them supporters of apartheid.
I am sick to death of people trying to paint everything they don’t like with the apartheid brush. It is the local equivalent of Godwin’s law, and it makes far less sense, and is applied far more liberally.
You’re possibly too young to have experienced the “Christelike Nationale Onderwys”. Apartheid and religion went (and still does) hand in hand. Evolution basically speaks of all humans regardless of race - this did not sit well with the white apartheid-era afrikaner, throw in ol’ Noah’s son doomed to be a bearer of wood and water because he had a sneak peek at his dangly bits and you’ve got the perfect scenario to disagree with evolution. Evolution is the great equilizer.
i agree that understanding and acceptance of evolution, should be the great equalizer. but then it means gasp i’m not better than you!!! and my religion is as valid as yours!!
and ofcourse the humdinger ‘I’M NOT AN APE’
rather
i had a bird in my school, that would want to physically assault you if called her an ape or monkey.
talk about insecure!!
Ahem, as an ex-racist ex-religious afrikaans person, I can assure you that the rationalisations can run thick and fast if you believe in evolution AND happen to dislike people from other races.
I’ll let your imagination do the work.
You have missed my point entirely.
I don’t understand why people keep quoting utter balderdash from news24 and taking it seriously. For sheer gutter ‘journalism’ they take the cake–they’re even worse than the HuffPo. If you enjoy reading illiterate, misinformed rubbish I can’t think of a better site to recommend.
Not surprising, I’m really good at that. 
I get my daily laughs from there. On the flip side though, you get a really good idea of what the masses are thinking, and it reminds you that the world is full of stupid, it serves a purpose.
If you think their “journalism” is bad, you should see some of the comments on the articles. 
So what news source is OK. What do you use?
A tip is to make sure your news source is not owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation. But it is always good I think to have more than one source.
None are perfect, but the Mail & Guardian make a fair fist of it. For opinion, the Daily Maverick are quite good (meaning I sometimes agree with them).
Nassim Taleb makes a very good argument that it is not necessary to use ANY news source: if news is truly important, it will get to you, and the rest is just sensation and gossip.
Balderdash, crap or otherwise, I think any news stories putting concepts such as evolution in a positive light in South Africa are reasonably noteworthy- and on a forum to promote discussion and analysis… it clearly did.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but News24 doesn’t actually have journalists of its own does it? Most of the stories seem to be taken from other sources like AFP, Reuters and SAPA. The poor editing and bad grammar seems to be little more than a bad attempt at avoiding plagiarism.