I think that both should be taught because they are the only two ways that people think we got here.
Hardly. The Judeo-Christian Creation myth is not the sole non-evolution exploration of human origins. Every religion has its own description of our origins, and not all of them involve special Creation.
Should we teach them all?
People think that creationism is too religous so you cant have it in school.
My main objection is that it's not
scientific enough. I don't care if the idea came from an old collection of stories - if there is scientific evidence to back it up, then it is perfectly acceptible in school. The issue is that there is literally zero evidence for the Creation myth - it has, in fact, been disproven in nearly every way imaginable by modern science - 6000 year old Earth? Wrong. Universe (or even just the planet) created in seven days? Nope. Light created before the sun? Wow, that's not even close. I could go on.
It just shows there is a creator and everyone can make that choice WHO that creator is or if he doesnt even believe in one.
And how is this shown? Because a really old collection of stories tells us so? That's hardly evidence. And science isn't a democratic process - nobody gets to "decide for themselves" whether the Earth is flat or spherical. This is called the Golden Mean fallacy - giving an "alternative theory" equal time in the science classroom is rediculous, because scientifically one of those positions is simply
wrong.
It would be bias to only teach creationism or evolutionism alone.
Yes, it would. Only
science would be taught in a
science classroom. Sounds reasonable to me. It's utterly rediculous to teach every hairbrained idea ever thought up in an old book to students as if it's on equal grounds with a theory that's been tested and passed through the peer review process. It's simply
not on the same level.
Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.
™ Version 4.2