The Instigator
smallstar1200
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
Anon_Y_Mous
Con (against)
Winning
22 Points

teaching creationism in schools

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
Anon_Y_Mous
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/23/2013 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,335 times Debate No: 32823
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (5)

 

smallstar1200

Pro

it is a pro because it gives an explanation on everything
Anon_Y_Mous

Con

Unless you have a different definition that you would rather use I believe these should suffice:

Teaching: The act of a government certified teacher passing selective knowledge on to a class.
Creationism: The belief that God created the world and everything in it.
Schools: Government funded education establishments.

I assume you are referring to public schools exclusively, because many private schools already teach creationism.

I look forward to your arguments in the next round.

Good luck!
Debate Round No. 1
smallstar1200

Pro

i am referring to public schools. I think creationism is as valid of a scientific theory as evolution so it should as well be taught in schools. Thanks i look forward to the next round
Anon_Y_Mous

Con

I'm going to try and avoid the usual arguments against creationism (ex. it's false) because, though it would support my cause, it would most likely cause this debate to spiral down into an argument over the validity of several origin theories.

'I think creationism is as valid of a scientific theory as evolution so it would as well be taught in schools.'

Okay, so if creationism is just as valid as evolution, then is there any particular reason all the other religions are invalid?

Assuming that there isn't, then we will have to teach every single culture's origin story. There are a bunch of them. And honestly, how could all of this knowledge help? Every minute spent teaching religion is a minute not learning english or reading. And this country is far enough behind as it is(1). Unless you propose increasing class time by a surmountable amount of time, we will fall farther down that table.

However, if there is a reason other religions are wrong, and should not be taught, then our government has essentially said that one religion (You're referring to the christian creationism, correct?) is superior to all the others. Oppression ensures, and I'm fairly sure other nations wouldn't too happy with our classification of their major religions. This could very well lead to disputes and potentially war.

Sources:

(1) http://nces.ed.gov...
Debate Round No. 2
smallstar1200

Pro

i believe all religions are valid but, should only be taught if wanted to learn not just evolution.
Anon_Y_Mous

Con

For your solution to work, the school would have to offer every view, and would require a staff member certified to teach each class. Also, in my experience, most people only learn about one religion, then they follow it and assume that reading a book from another religion would count as an evil act. The exceptions to this are agnostics and unaffiliated, because they learn about religions for factual information, or occasionally fun. But I don't think that you'd want your creationism class taught by a non-believer. So, essentially, you will have to choose to sacrifice quality to lower quantity of teachers, or you could get preachers to teach the classes, but to have one for each subject would be very expensive, which means less money for other classes or renovation.

The other big problem with your idea is that the amounts of material in each option are not nearly equal.

If one were to take the course on evolution, then they'd have a good two to three weeks of material to cover, and even then they would probably be pressed for time.

In creationism, on the other hand, one would read from the bible, and maybe do an analysis or two. Then they'd sit around and do nothing while the evolution students scrambled to finish their course.

This would lead to rushed assignments and some ruined GPAs. That means students would be forced away from the harder classes in order to maintain their grades.

Essentially, most students would just take the easiest class. And for the people who actually believe that theory, they'll have to put up with a horde of hecklers who are in the class solely for the grade. Is this the kind of class you want?

Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by smallstar1200 3 years ago
smallstar1200
ill be back tommarow im leaving
Posted by smallstar1200 3 years ago
smallstar1200
post please.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by wiploc 3 years ago
wiploc
smallstar1200Anon_Y_MousTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro didn't show up. He had the burden of proof, but never argued for the resolution.
Vote Placed by jackintosh 3 years ago
jackintosh
smallstar1200Anon_Y_MousTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Clear victory, you cannot win a real debate in only 4 sentences.
Vote Placed by Pennington 3 years ago
Pennington
smallstar1200Anon_Y_MousTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: I am a YEC. Con smashed here. Pro never offered a reasonable argument. He appealed to just beliefs and not reason. Con showed good reason why YEC should not be taught in schools. I disagree of course but I did not debate.
Vote Placed by Smithereens 3 years ago
Smithereens
smallstar1200Anon_Y_MousTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: CVB. Con won this, but one needs an RFD to say it.
Vote Placed by medv4380 3 years ago
medv4380
smallstar1200Anon_Y_MousTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro only used one line circular arguments, and bad grammar as well.