should creationism be taught in schools?

Creationism cannot be taught as a part of secondary school or college science curriculum, simply because it is not science. All science, necessarily, is based on the scientific method. The latter means that every single word that a science teacher utters is based on people's observations of the natural world, which were followed by questions, hypotheses, predictions, and tests. Obviously, one cannot physically observe God, and one cannot, therefore, study God or God's work through the use of the conventional scientific method. That does not, of course, mean, that a person cannot believe in God or in that God is the Creator of everything; yet, if one has this belief, no scientific exploration of it is possible (or called for). --Richard

After doing research on this issue, I believe creationism should not be taught in schools. Not only is it unconstitutional through several court cases, but intelligent design (creationism) is not a scientific theory and has no quantifiable scientific data. What about the people who do not believe in creationism--as in they don't believe in god, or are a different religion, thus do not believe in the theory. Any subject matter that is taught in schools that is affiliated with a religion is not fair to the students and their beliefs. Let's say we do let creationism be taught in schools, what if it starts to get to far? You can't avoid bias teachers thus, falling into the slippery slope. If you let one thing be taught, what next?

While I agree that creationism should not be taught in schools, I think it's necessary to look at it from merely a scientific point of view. Creationism and ID are not science and have no place being taught in a science classroom. However, when you try to incorporate an element of fairness,in saying it would not be appropriate for people to have to hear about creation if they don't believe in it, the same can be said of students now who are hearing about evolution and not believing in it. Isn't it unfair for them?

First , welcome to EvC. We're glad you chose to join us.Let me ask you a question. Would it be fair to teach folk that 2 + 2 = 5?Would it be unfair to those who believe 2 + 2 = 5 to teach that 2 + 2 = 4?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

We're glad you chose to join EvC.

---

It would be unfair to teach that 2+2=5 because we know it is not true. No one would argue a set of beliefs to tell you it's not. Some things are facts and other beliefs. In the school system we teach what we know to be facts based on observed evidence and knowledge. In this sense it would be unfair to teach anyone something we knew not to be correct. Applying this to beliefs is much harder. I would agree that the different idea needs to be said so that this person would have the opportunity to decide what they believe in (or which number they chose to be the correct answer to 2+2). In a public school though, they should be exposed to this idea in a philosophy or religion class. Not science.

Well, we know for a fact that Evolution happened.We know for a fact that the earth is billions of years old.And we know for a fact that the universe is tens of billions of years old.So how can we discuss in a philosophy class the reasoning behind people accepting things that can be proven to be wrong?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I take the definition of philosophy to be the critical analysis of fundamental assumptions or beliefs. Philosophy would seek to understand why people believe the things they do, it would not seek to prove what is right and what is wrong. Because despite these facts, you would be unable to convince everyone of the truth in evolution. They have a stronghold in beliefs that you would be unable to alter. This is why I suggested philosophy. Simply to gain more knowledge on peoples beliefs, not to discuss that they are wrong.

It's not a matter of fairness to let creation be taught in schools, it's a matter of constitutionality. The "public" in public schools means that anyone can attend without being scrutinized for their beliefs and religious backgrounds. Evolution has been studied and accepted into the science world as a possible theory of human existence. The theory is not pushed on individuals, where if ID was taught, it's very bias to one side and could be viewed as pushing a certain belief without evidence on an individual. If you want to talk about fairness, then let’s not teach a lot of things. Why teach any scientific theories at all then? Why even teach science? There are always going to be people who don't believe in certain aspects of science--it's impossible to make everyone happy. Also, if it's only fair to teach both, evolution and creation, then it's only fair to teach all theories of human existence from every religion. It wouldn't be fair just to use the creationist theory. Hence, it's not only constitutionally correct to only teach evolution in school, it is the most equal ground of teaching science in public schools without getting entangled in religion.
________________________________________This message has been edited by a1robbie, 01-26-2006 07:55 PM

I think Creationism should be taught in schools. I feel that high school students are old and mature enough to handle all of the information and then form their own opinions on the subject. I personally would have like to have been taught a little more about both evolution and creationism during my days in high school.

In which class period?

While it may be true that such students would be old enough and mature enough to handle the info and form their own opinions, why should Creationism be taught in school.Unlike evolutionary theory, Creationism can and will be taught at church, or in church schoolrooms. It can be picked up by one's family, or simply by opening the Bible and reading the first few paragraphs.Thus it is already out in the mainstream and can be picked up on one's own. Given that it has no real connection to the rest of scientific investigation, there would be little reason to have it in a science class.Could you discuss why leaving it up to church and family and bible is insufficient?

---

holmes
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)

Okay. Do you mean this one...? or this one ...? or this one...? or this one...? or this one...? This message has been edited by jar, 01-27-2006 10:09 AM

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I keep asking myself, "why is it so important for Creationism to be taught in public schools?" Is it a failure of all the Sunday school teachers and religious leaders to adequately explain away scientific discoveries that contradict their teachings? Is this a cry for help on their part?What exactly is it that they are hoping will be the result on the collective conscience of grade school students?Seems to me that Religion has looked to Scientists and Scholars to prove they are right in their teachings for hundreds of years, but what many Scientists and Scholars discovered was often in direct conflict and usually supressed by the church as a result.Scientific Community: AH HA! We have discoverd that the Earth isn't the center of the Universe and we in fact revolve around the sun?Religious Community: Heretic! That's not what we teach!Scientific Community: Wow! We have discovered that great cultures and civilizations existed before, during, and after the biblical dating of the great flood.Religious Community: Not possible! All was wiped out! Lie's and deceit!Scientific Community: Just look at all these amazing fossils we have discovered.Religious Communty: You are misrepresenting the evidence. It goes against the teachings of the bible and therefore incorrect.Scientific Community: Rainbows are a result of refraction of light through water droplets as it travels to our eyes.Religious Community: But, rainbows are a gift from God. It is his symbol to a promise never to flood the world again. Why would you want to take his gift and simply explain it away as a natural event? You can't teach this to our children.Discovery after discovery and the Religious group is left saying...Religious Community: Okay... look you guys just aren't helping our cause any. Is there anyone out there who have a few theories for the Creation of all things as described by the bible. Something that we can base a public school curriculum on. Anyone?Kent Hovind: Well I had a few ideas...Religious Community: Anyone else?..... Please!- Babelfish

---

The argument goes something like this: "I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says Man, "the Babelfish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED."
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets killed on the next zebra crossing.

quote:

---

I think Creationism should be taught in schools.

---

Sure, why not? We'll put it into the same class as the Flat Earth Theory and Holocaust Denial.

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt