Should public schools teach creationism alongside evolution in science classes?
Freedom of Inquiry
I believe that there is much evidence in support of both sides of the debate. Thus, I feel that both should be taught, along with all supporting evidence. This will cause students to search for the answers themselves instead of force-feeding them the consensus view. If the evidence is so strong against creationism, why should we be so afraid of presenting the idea in school?
Posted by: Jacob_ThomasHey! DON'T LET THE GOVERNMENT TEACH US WHAT THEY THINK WE SHOULD KNOW!
Nothing has real evidence if you think about it, anything could happen! There is no evidence that you or any of this world exists! We could be in some freak dream or something for all scientists know!! Let the school teach creationism! Who cares, if you hate what someone is saying that badly... Don't listen to it! You have the option to not listen... At least if they are taught side by side then children get to choose which one they believe... Besides church is once a week and school is 5! Who wants to learn something they don't believe in 5/7 days of the week for a year??!?!?
Posted by: RepublicanKind of
Bible study should be optional. Children can study scripture there. But the state should regulate that curriculum and the religious messages it gives children. I think creationism is not a science, but superstition. As fallacious as it really is, I don't think that it should be against the law to teach it.
Posted by: lovingsingletonBoth are theories.
Evolution and creationism are simply both theories! In creationism, an intelligent designer created the world using science. In evolution something came from nothing. Why should one side be taught? The intelligent Designer used science in order to create the earth, placing it at an exact spot for humans to be able to survive. That is the science in creationism. Evolution and creationism have the same evidence its just the difference in our assumptions. Evolution's theory has never been able to be replicated so therefore it is merely a theory. Teaching both sides of these topics in school would present two different sides, let the students decide what they want to believe, but I believe it comes across as unfair to only present one side. Almost like you are trying to hide something if you can't teach the one side but you can teach the other.
Posted by: Anonymousyes it should
You say there is no proof that creationism is possible. I can say the same about evolution. Who determines if evolution is reliable? Scientist. Letting scientist determine what we learn is very bias. It should be either both or none. Both are possible. 40-45% of Americans believe in creationism. So why is it so against schools? Because atheist are ignorant and only want what they want taught in schools and don't care about other beliefs. Evolution is being pushed on kids and aren't given a choice what to believe ( in schools). Yes it is true. I'm in school and I witnessed it. Don't say its not because they don't teach it as a fact. Maybe they don't in some cases, but they make it sound like anything other then evolution is stupid.
P.S. Qopel your an idiot.Posted by: samuraiIf you teach one, teach the other,these are children's minds we're dealing with
There should be options. A child may feel like evolution is only being taught in schools rather than creationism because it is the correct way. That is a decision that should be left up to the child and/or his parents. The government should have no control over one's religious views or opinions. First Amendment. Look it up
Posted by: KayBritt09Yes, it is still a theory.
I do not think they should read scripture, but they should still teach it. It's a perfectly valid theory and it still deserves a mention. They did it in my school and it in no way did anything but make us look at alternatives to the theory of evolution. If we teach just evolution, students will believe in that, and we shouldn't force students to focus on ONE idea when there are ideas like creationism out there that are just as valid. Let kids choose for themselves what they want to believe, so open the amount of theories for them to choose from.
Posted by: jzonda415Evolution is not fact.
Creation has been taught in public schools long before evolution ever was. Evolution keeps on changing and now they say that there was a divine something or whatever that must have started it and then evolution began. Something cannot be made out of nothing. When you see a wrist watch you don't think that it was spontaneously formed into a watch. There was a creator to that watch. The world is way to complex. Even Darwin said the human eye is much too complex, and that's such a small thing. A bang or whatever could not have created this whole world. Why do you think people are always trying to figure out who they are and what their purpose in life is? Because God's missing and He's the one who put that desire in them.
Posted by: AnonymousI think schools should teach Creationism alongside Evolution.
If schools have to teach Evolution, they should have to teach Creationism, too. Teaching only the theory of Evolution is like saying that's the only one to believe, as it's the only one taught. Schools should have to teach both sides, allowing students to choose which one they wanted to believe, if any.
Posted by: AnonymousThe theory of evolution is based on faith, and not fact.
Go ahead and look through any microscope or telescope and you'll see a multitude logical, factual evidence that points to a creator. It takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe that we were made based on intelligent design by a God who loves us.
Also, would you please read the constitution. IF you had you'd see "Separation of church and state" isn't in it. The constitution was written to protect our freedom to practice religion in our homes, schools, and the public squares- not banish it! Our country was founded and built on biblical principals and our forefathers were in fact Christians who actually printed the first bibles in this country in order to be used in schools! Don't believe it? Do some research. It's amazing to me how the ignorant masses just swallow the lies that are fed to them without ever bothering to do some simple investigation.
The real argument here is not about teaching kids "faith" in schools. How about giving them a choice? After all, evolution is still just a THEORY and has not ever been proven. But yet so many choose to put blind faith in evolution! It has virtually become a religion in itself!!! Based on faith in a theory... No, this discussion is about giving them the historical and scientific information and then allowing them to make informed decisions for themselves.Posted by: AnonymousWhy can't I choose what my child learns? I'm the parent here!
Is it so hard to offer parents and kids choices or options? My kids get to opt out of gym, art, music, languages, health class, etc. Why can't I choose whether or not my child learns about evolution or creationism or both? They don't have to be taught "alongside" of each other. Let parents decide whether their children will be taught one or the other or both. It's not a big deal to do that when so many other classes are optional.
Posted by: AnonymousYes
I myself am a Creationist, and will not side with evolution because of my strong belief in a creator. So being forced to learn about something that is only a theory, doesn't really seem fair to me. Even some scientists today feel that evolution can't explain all the things in our universe. Shouldn't that prove something?
Posted by: lasagna4cheesePeople need to learn both points.
It is limiting freedom and it is a disgrace to democracy not to teach both points of view. By refusing to pay Christian schools and make them separate from public schools they are (whether trying to or not) killing Christianity, which is one of the most positive religions in the world! I don't understand how anyone can think differently considering Christianity is what most of our nations policy's and everything we stand for as a nation was founded upon.
Posted by: AnonymousNot out of the Bible.
Creation should not be taught in the out of the Bible. That is not what should be taught. But there are scientific theories at come from the view of a creationist that have lots of supporting evidence and just as much credibility as evolution. There are other theories besides evolution, so why are they never even suggested as another possible theory? We say everyone has the right to believe what they want, yet we only provide one theory for them, and teach it like it's a proven fact that has no other explanation. If creation was nothing more than a made up idea with no truth to it, why does it matter if it's taught? No one would believe it.
Posted by: AnonymousEvolution dosn't hold water
To say evolution is fact is an outright lie. Evolution is a form of origin science not operational science which can be tested by the scientific method. Variation within kinds is not empirical proof of evolution. If anything it points to a creator. Just a few of the hundreds of questions to ask evolutionists. Where is the evidence in the fossil record? 200,000,000 or more fossils but no transitional fossils that hold water. Explain the Cambrian Explosion. Irreducible complexity refutes chance as a designer. There is no known law of nature no known process or sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter. Information science confirms creation. I could go on and on and on with evidences pointing toward a creator but that wont change the faith that evolutionists hold. If they would have had correct info as a child they might have had the facts straight now.
Posted by: GavinETeaches the truth.
Kids need to be taught the truth. Religion is not the same thing as Creationism. This is something not everybody comprehends. Many people believe that it will cause conflicts but that's only if you make a big deal out of it. People need to grow more spiritually and learn the truth. The Bible clearly states how it all happened. Once said by Isaac Asimov was "the saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom." Why is this? Well, people aren't taking time to learn the truth that we were created by God and for God, he is the reason why we're here. So I believe we need to acknowledge the fact and teach Creationism alongside evolution in science.
Posted by: Lizard2676It's so obvious!
How can you have a creation without a Creator? You can't just randomly create something out of nothing! That's absolutely ridiculous! Look around you for goodness sake! Isn't it obvious? The world and universe are beautiful places, designed specifically by God. Everything here, especially us, is created in SO much detail, that it couldn't possibly happen randomly. God loves us all SO much! He's a loving caring God who created the world for His glory! I believe Evolution is just a theory people hide behind so that they don't have to face the facts. The fact that they are accountable to God for all they've done. So, yes! Teach Creationism in public schools. Let the kids decide what they want to believe. Give them both sides of the story.
Posted by: Anonymousits fair game
I do believe in both evolution and creationism, but we only teach one type in our schools. It is unfair that only one side gets to be told, there is such a thing as religious freedom. We don't have to say it is the truth, but let the students decide which story they want to believe. Or they can believe both like me.
Posted by: cyeagerTeach the facts
Evolution is just as "religious" as creation. It requires just as much (if not more) faith due to it's complete lack of proof. Teaching only evolution like it is a fact and not showing the opposing viewpoints is not education, it is brainwashing. I don't see how you can say that evolution is any more scientific than creation since there is absolutely no proof that evolution happened or is happening.
Posted by: AnonymousIt is important that different perspectives are provided to students.
To be a worldly student, one needs to understand his or her surroundings through many perspectives. Though the United States is a secular nation, learning creationism is not enforcing religion on the students yet it just presents another view on what many believe how the world was created. It would be unbalanced to only teach evolution. The student would become more complete by understanding both.
Posted by: AnonymousChildren get to choose!
If we teach the children creationism and evolution at the same time, I have nothing to say. Because the children have the right to be exposed to every possibility in which they can choose what to believe and what to choose from. So it is our responsibility to provide children a wide variety of choices to believe in. Thank you.
Posted by: soccercuberEvolution is bogus Intelligent design.
evolution is bogus scientists claim there is evidence yet they never tell you the evidence since it doesn't exist! Intelligent design has evidence if you look at how complex the world and everything is you know this can't happen by chance. What are the odds that this the only planet in the universe that has water the perfect distance from a star and the perfect atmoshphere to support life? It won't happen by chance. It is impossible. The world was DESIGNED by an intelligent BEING. It is a scientific theory because it best explains the existance of the universe and everything in it. Evolution say that we came from something and evolved. Therefore, one would go back until there was nothing to evolve from. Wait if there was nothing existing then how did it come to be? Oh intelligent design. Thus ends my argument for creation aka intelligent design.
Posted by: bobby132Besides being right, it's the law.
In some states, teachers are actually required by law to provide as much knowledge as they possess about any given topic. Meaning they are compelled to present each and every view that pertains to a topic. So legally, some schools have to to give the arguements for both creationism and evolution.
Posted by: AnonymousSure.
I think you should teach both because intelligent design has some scientific backers. I was taught both and prefer evolution, but either way I don't see ANY harm from being balanced...
Posted by: 16kadamsWhy would you only show one side?
If you only show kids the theory of evolution, they will not have a chance to believe the other side. There is evidence for creationism. Just read the book The Case for a Creator. I have not met one Christian who blindly believes on their faith. They always have a reason. You are sending out a message that evolution is definitely true by saying that creationism should not be taught in schools. Besides, the job of DNA is to stay the same, not to change a lot. It will change very little. Matter did not come out of nowhere, as is described in the big bang theory.
Posted by: AnonymousI believe schools should teach both.
Everyone in America deserves a choice, at least that's what they tell us: the choice of abortion, the choice to marry whomever you choose and the choice to choose your own religion. How can you expect the young people in America to be able to make a good decision if you only give them one side? Freedom of Religion is one of the basic values of our country. Everyone should be able to learn what their religion believes instead of having the theory of evolution shoved down their throats.
They say that the Christians in America are forcing our religion onto people while our children are forced to sit in class and listen to a theory be taught as fact and told that their religion is not valid. How is that freedom of religion?Posted by: AnonymousEvolutionism is a theory, just as Creationism.
Evolution, no matter how widely accepted in Academia, is a theory, meaning that it has not been proven as fact. Creationism is a theory in the same sense and manner. Since Evolutionism is a theory, it should be presented alongside a viable alternative such as Creationism, and it should be left up to the students to choose one or the other for themselves.
Posted by: R0m4nticCarThere should be equal rights for all people no matter what they believe.
If a large chunk of the people in the US believe in Creationism I think it should be allowed to be taught. Evolution is still a theory. Until it is proven as fact I think everyone has the right to learn about both Creationism and Evolution in all of our schools.
Posted by: AnonymousSeems fair to me
kids have a very sensible mind, teaching them evolution at such a young age is pretty much encouraging them to believe in it instead of being an option. So to make it equal teaching both things encourages kids to study both of them and find out for themselves what they believe in.
Posted by: naomipenaYes!
How is it fair to subject children to the Big Bang theory but we're not able to tell them about creation, the very belief this nation was based on. If evolution was a PROVEN FACT then it wouldn't be a THEORY and couldn't be proven wrong. I believe every child should have the option of choosing for themselves what they believe or don't believe.
Posted by: AnonymousCreation is Truth
Creationism is not about religion- it is about the true way this earth and all of its matter were made. Many people tie the word creationism with religion, and immediately there are those who are vehemently against teaching creationism. All branches of science were started by an insight on creation, but since the days of Darwin and probably before, evolution came into play and distorted the true meaning of science. You may argue until you are blue in the face, but creationism is truth, and it should be taught just as much and if not more than the evolution theory.
Posted by: AnonymousTo be able to teach the theory of evolution, you should also teach the theory of creationism.
The idea of giving kids an education is not only to teach them subjects such as math and science, but to also teach them to be able to think on their own. Teaching students only one side of the theory of how human life began is biased. You must give the students multiple points of view so that they can make their own judgment.
Posted by: AnonymousFirstly, I must apologize for my kin. Here's my take.
This is such a multi-dimensional question, and perhaps even a flawed one. I'll do my best to answer in an impromptu fashion.
Foremost, the equation of Creationism and Evolution is a heavily skewed assumption. Creationism is, by most peoples' standards, a theory on the origin of everything, and subsequently, the degree of creation. Did a Creator create the most basic of matter and then let it go? Or did He create today's most complex life forms in the very beginning? Furthermore, who is He? This question alone opens up an entirely new, albeit unnecessary and possibly irrelevant, conversation. The implication of a creator and the degree of complexity in the primordial creation makes for a conversation of the very age of the earth and beyond. There are more layers beyond this, I'm sure. All in all, Creationism pertains to substantially more than Evolution does, going far beyond mere scientific capacity
That being said, Evolution is, as I understand it at its most basic level, a theory on the origin of species. Darwin theorized that organisms would evolve based on their surroundings, ergo "survival of the fittest." As far as I know, and I may be mistaken, this theory never involved HOW the very first matter and energy came to be. So, that factor is removed. Also, there are those that split the theory into "microevolution" and "macroevolution." "Species to better, but same species" and "species to entirely different species", respectively. Microevolution is remarkably easy to prove, but macroevolution is not so. One thing it requires a lot of, is time. The terms "New earth" and "Old earth" collide here. Creationists often side with the new, and evolution, by necessity, with the old. Nevertheless, this conversation doesn't HAVE to take place. One could assume a creator that placed the first mass and energy trillions of years ago, and that would allow the basis of Creationism, and the time for Evolution.
Now, I believe I'm straying from the original question. Seeing as the two theories in question are different, the question is slightly illogical as they likely would not be seen "alongside" each other. Also, one demands a personal conviction, while the other does not. In the end, assuming we are talking about the areas in which the two theories clash, I DO believe they should be both taught, equally and carefully.
The talk of the two no doubt brings up existential questions, but assuming those are avoided, I think they are both valid for teaching. But their boundaries and implications must be clearly and purely defined, as it is not a matter of being on one side or the other.
As a creationist, I feel I must implore you to realize that creationists are not all ignorant. Please, do not base your opinions of us based on a few of poorly-worded paragraphs below on a debate website.
All the best,
H. AragonPosted by: H.AragonThere is a god
It's so sad that people believe evolution! There's so many gaps in evolution with the fossils! There is no true proof but yet teachers teach to children and children are mislead to believe lies that Satan smiles at.PEOPLE say that seeing is believing... Well through the bible and Jehovah gods creations we see exactly what came from god :)
Posted by: AnonymousYes
Creationism should be taught in public schools. People are so offended if people bring up creationism, but how do they think we feel only being taught evolution? People who say " I would not get along with my teacher who teaches creationism", is extremely absurd to me. Graduating from a public school and being a christian, I'm offended that all I was taught was evolutionism. If your going to teach one you also need to teach the other.
Posted by: AnonymousGive kids both sides of the story.
At a school, public or private, it is the teachers' job to teach the students the truth. This has not been done in most science classes since creationism has been eliminated. Evolutionism and creationism are both theories. No one other then God was there at the creation of the world, so how can we say how it happened? The truth is we can't. Sure, we have theories, but theories aren't necessarily true. You have to be able to prove something with evidence for it to be true. Both theories discussed here have to be accepted by faith.
In public and private schools, I believe we should give students both sides of the story. Either the world was created randomly and without purpose, or the world was created by a loving Creator for an express purpose. I go to a Christian school, and though we believe in Creationism, Evolutionism is still taught. Both as THEORIES. I'm not saying public school teachers have to get up and read Genesis to their class, but they need to give students both sides of the story. That's the truthful and fair way.Posted by: AnonymousLogic and science.
I have read almost all the arguments against this position and there are a couple arguments I would like to address.
First, In logic there are two areas of reasoning: inductive and deductive. Deductive is generally equated with necessary inferences and inductive is generally equated with probable inferences. Math, for example, is deductive, rational, and analytic. Science is inductive, empirical, obtained by senses, and synthetic, putting things together. In inductive reasoning no none can prove, on a scale of 1% to 100% if there was a scale of cogency, 100%, anything. The argument can be 99.9% cogent, the inductive equivalent to valid, but it still is not deductively valid or following with necessity. Since science is a part of inductive reasoning (I think both sides of this argument agree with this.) it can not prove anything. Therefore, no one can say that evolution is proven. It might be very close to 100% but it is not 100% true.
Secondly, if creationism were not a science no scientists would study it or believe it. If you were to look up creationist scientists on Google you would find many, many esteemed scientists.
Thirdly, there is evidence for creationism. I do not know all the details but here are some examples: In the fossil record there are big systematic gaps between the various living kinds. Earth's features were mostly occurred due to large catastrophes. There are many others but I don't have time to write them down.
Fourth, if public schools should teach evolution, they should also teach them the other side of the coin. I understand that it seems that if one were to creationism then they should teach every other creation story. This argument is fallacious because it is again assuming that creationism is a myth like the Greek and Roman gods. Since creationism is a science it should be taught like evolution.
Also to only teach evolution is a danger and the child could think that evolution is the only right option. A radical example of children believing one thing because it was the only thing taught to them is the Hitler Youth.
Since the Public schools are trying to remain as unbiased as possible they should teach what generally is the other side of the coin which is creationism.Posted by: AnonymousBoth sides should be presented.
There is no reason why both perspectives cannot be taught together. Students will be able to make better informed decisions if they are given both sides of the argument. Providing both sides of the debate would only be beneficial to everyone and there is no reason it shouldn't be done.
Posted by: AnonymousYes, to avoid indoctrination
Yes it should. It's not education to tell someone one side of the story, but not the other, that's indocrination. I think teachers have a moral obligation to teach both sides of the story, otherwise it's no different than censorship, which is illegal in America. Freedom of Speech should guarantee honest debate.
Posted by: giraffeloverShouldn't Be Limited
The object of school is to educate its students, part of which is about the world. Regardless of what the truth may be it is incumbent upon teachers to inform students that there is another side to Darwin's evolution...a side which happens to be the fundamental aspect for billions of peoples' belief systems. Therefore, to teach only one side is to say that only one side exists, which is simply untrue. Only informing students of the side of the debate relating to evolution ends the debate entirely. It is not the responsibility of schools nor their right to decide what students ought to believe by removing choice. Imagine what this website would be like if only one side of debates could be heard.
Posted by: ace_of_spadesEvolution isn't fact, neither is creationism
We cannot prove either evolution or creationism. Each should be offered to students to help opinionated the future leaders of America. Schooling isn't about teaching selective material. It is about letting kids grow their minds and gaining opinion. Not all creationists are set on disproving evolution. Stop choosing to selectively brainwash the future of America.
Posted by: AnonymousEvolution Sucks!
Duhh, God created the world and everything in it. It is not honoring to God to defy him. You need to honor God by saying and knowing that God alone Created the earth, not some huge accident. I don't know what you are thinking, but the idiots who voted no need Jesus.
Posted by: AnonymousBoth evoluation and creationism are theories.
Scientist are not completely sure if the evoluation is true. They BELIEVE that "The Big Bang" theory is the most logical reason how our universe was created. People who BELIEVE in their religion that a moghty power that cannot be seen had created the whole universe. By the way, the key word in my statement is BELIEVE!
Posted by: AnonymousWhat are you talking about?
Honestly I figure if I post on this side it may get through to one of you. How naive are you that you are denying the plausibility of evolution but you accept the idea that not one organism has changed since the beginning of time? If that were the case, why are there no homosapien skeletons found during prehistoric times? I am a catholic and believe in God, but how can you look at the Bible and assume that everything in it is word for word accurate? It was written and created by men and to err is human (I believe it says that somewhere in the good book) so wouldn't it just maybe be possible that they messed up a teensy weensy bit when writing it? If you honestly don't accept that evolution may be possible you aren't a true Christian, you're an idiot.
Posted by: AnonymousChildren should hear both sides
Children learn about Greek Gods and other religious history, I think they should be able to read about creationism as well. It's not fair for them to hear from only one side, there should be other options presented, especially since that is our history in America. We cater to so many religions, why not America's historical religion? Equal time should be provided.
Posted by: sarahgarnerTrue scientific discovery leads to intelligent design
When it comes to the origin of life there are only two possibilities: creation or spontaneous generation. Spontaneous generation was disproved years ago; you cannot create organic life from inorganic matter. A good example of creationism or intellient design? the DNA molecule, an incredible micro, digital, error-correcting, redundant, self duplicating, information storage and retrieval system. Now that's science.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is Science
Creationism is science and there is ample evidence supporting it. Both are incredibly valid theories, both are supported by science. In science class, students have the right to know both sides. Not giving them all the information is either deeming them incapable of deciding for themselves or going against the fact that science always needs to be questioned and that theories can't be taught as facts. It takes more faith to believe in evolution than creationism.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism should be taught alongside evolution in a science classroom.
Creationism should be taught alongside evolution in a science classroom in order to expose students to all areas of scientific thought and theory. This goes for all areas of science. All viewpoints should be presented and fairly challenged and tested. If one viewpoint of science is presented, it gives a biased viewpoint. This misleads students, which is the opposite goal of science education; to enlighten all through the scientific method and the search for truth.
Posted by: AnonymousWell, why not?
Everyone is arguing over whether each is true or not. But that is a matter of belief. Anyone can argue that their side has more evidence. So why not teach both and leave it up to the students to decide what to believe, instead of only teaching one theory of the origin of science. If you don't provide alternate ideas that many support, than you really aren't giving them a choice of what to believe.
Posted by: AnonymousYes, because evolution is not a fact.
Evolution is an unconfirmed hypothesis. It is as simple as that. It is part of an unproven theory; macro-evolution. More and more people keep teaching evolution as a fact when it's not! Creationism has as many points if not more then evolution. Creation has never had a disproving point whilst evolution has had many. Teachers are being fired on a regular basis for refusing to state that Darwin's theory a fact. We are a democracy, right? Christianity should be taught in schools. By forcing Christianity out of schools they take out the very policies our nation was founded upon.
Posted by: LeviBackwards thinking in America.
You could argue that both evolution and creationism are beliefs, only one is taught in public schools. Why would we shun a belief in a country that is built on Christian precepts. This is the only country I have been to or heard of that puts its own faith (at least in origin) and places it on the back burner for other faiths and lifestyles. NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD DOES THAT.
Posted by: AnonymousLet them decide
Every child should have the right to choose and teaching them along side each other allows them to choose which one they think is true and which one they think is not. It is good for kids to think and to be exposed to different theories so they know the difference when defending what they believe and can counteract on a debate between the two. Also evolution and creation are both theories and you must have faith in order to believe in one or the other and its not fair if only evolution is taught... They are both theories so they should both get the chance to influence the children.
Posted by: AnonymousWe should not brainwash our children with nonsense of evolution.
Trust me no one wants to face the wrath. Because it is the best thing to do. We should not brainwash our children with nonsense of evolution. Soon those who don't believe will find out who's boss. The big G is coming back and it will be too late. CHANGE YOUR LIFE. DO IT NOW.
Posted by: AnonymousBoth are theories. Why not?
We have never seen evolution as it is taught in classrooms today. In fact we don’t know if it is true. We can’t see it, touch it, smell it, hear it. We’re taught however it is true. Now I’m not saying evolution is wrong. I’m just saying it can’t be proved scientifically. It seems more like an opinion of view. Almost like…….a religion or creationism…..you have to accept it and believe in it. Creationism, evolution…..both are theories. So why are we being taught only one opinion?
Posted by: Anonymousif you're going to teach the fiction, why not teach the fact?
There is tons of evidence of creation, and barly any for evolution. Radio metric dating is inacurate because it asumes you know specifics about the original material. Fossils are more evidencefor creation than for evolution. Most fossils look as is they didn't just die, but were killed, lining up perfectly with the great flood. More evidence of the great flood: the grand canion, that rock that has dino tracks going up virticaly, rocks with wave marks in then in the middle of random deserts. Dinos still exist. They found a dino bone so freash that it still had red blood cells living in it. They found evidence of dinos in congo, and resercher found a baby one in a whale belly. The big bang makes no sence, there is no evidence, and it is scientificly impossible! (read the evolution handbook section on the big bang) there are no missing limks. That is the problem, they are missing! All missing links were proven to be a hoax. (see it couldn't just happen capter 14, and the evolution handbook chapter 1, a brefe history of evolution) many organisms couldn't live without each other (it couldn't just happen chapter 13) they couldn't evolve without eachother, and the odds of them evolving at the exact same time, and getting to the exact right place just in time to save each others life is astronomical. The bible is the most historicly correct book in the world and gives us the account of the begining of the world. If you want more evidence, read it couldn't just happen, the evolution handbook, the bible, or visit the institute for creation reserch. Or reply to this.
Posted by: creationist1Of course!
By teaching only evolution, the government is imposing on our rights to freedom of religion. Evolution is not fact, all you ignorant people who voted "no." They are giving us only one option to choose from: "this is only a theory, but it's the only theory I'm going to give you." You need to teach all options, or none at all. If church and state are indeed separate, why do we swear on the Bible in court? And you don't have to have a religion to believe in creationism. Even if I wasn't a Christian, I wouldn't believe the theory of evolution. There is no way I am related to fish and apes.
Posted by: AnonymousEvolution is stupid.
As a life-long Christian, I never questioned scripture, it made sense, I didn't ask myself any questions about evolution until my teens. This wasn't because it finally made sense and I finally escaped my delusions, but because I couldn't ignore the opportunity to once again contest the foolishness of one of my dearest friends. He's a smart guy (IQ 135), mine's 136; and we debate alot. This time stood out though, repetitions after repetitions, that were so meaningless, they didn't even bother to depreciate, and he knew it. So evolutionists have skeletons, which could easily be interpreted as proof of extinction, rather than proof of evolution. When people defend evolution as being a theory in the way that gravity and electricity are theories, they ignore the fact that gravity and electricity are evident and uncontroversial. Evolution is a leap and a deterrent to good sense, it will never be proven and it will never be near-unanimously accepted, the most evolutionists can ever expect is tolerance. The same goes for Creationism. Both theories offer answers and I think because Evolution offers more it thereby makes more sense, but answers shouldn't be confused with facts. Why can't their be room for both views in science classes?, it isn't unreasonable, it's a concession for both sides, a compromise, it's diplomacy, if you contest that, you are a fool and a hypocrite who will find more peace in contradiction than actual peace. I believe that I am more than the legacy of an amoeba because I and everyone else are children of God. It also helps that evolution is so retarded, and at 16, I know the German had the fish.
Posted by: AnonymousLet them decide.
No, Creationism is something that only one religion of people believe. If you were going to teach Creationism you would also have to teach ALL OTHER BELIEFS!
Just teach them the scientific background to mankind and then as they get older, let them research other theories on their own and let them decide which one they believe in.Posted by: AnonymousYES!!!!
There is NO way to "scientifically prove" the origin of life--for a theory to become SCIENTIFIC FACT it has to be observable, measurable, and repeatable-all of which are obviously impossible to use to prove the origin of life-None of us were there at the time to observe it, it cannot be repeated (one-time thing) and you cannot measure it. Therefore-either theories of the origin of life require FAITH-one in an immortal GOD, the other, in immortal Matter (rocks/organisms/etc have just always existed). All the "evidence" evolutionists use is not evidence at all, it has all been disproven. Evolution is just humanity's way of creating their own story of how the earth began so they do not have to answer to a Higher Authority and therefore can do whatever they want and live their life according to their own agenda.
Posted by: AnonymousEvidence supports creation and refutes evolution.
There is no known mechanism to create the DNA information needed to make any organ, system, or body plan. Mutation filtered through natural selection is a hypothesis, empirical data shows it never happens. Information theory, Genetics, fossils, geology, all empirically support creation. Evolution is fine if you like the sesame street version of science. However, if you want the how or why or any empirical data, evolution comes up empty.
Posted by: mejc2Even Darwin doesn't believe in Evolution
When Darwin came up with the theory for evolution, the microscopes were very simple and all he could see was the basic shape of a cell. He said that if we later found cells to be more complex, his theory would be impossible. We now know that cells are much more complex, so why are we still even debating this theory??
Posted by: AnonymousOf Course
Why would schools only teach one point of view about how the earth came to be? Students should be able to make their own decision on what to believe. Also, what happened to the religious rights of the teachers? Is religion not what our whole nation was originally based on?
Posted by: AnonymousEvolution is constantly changing, whereas the Bible is not. It is the one book of Truth.
The Bible has many scientific facts expressed in it long before man had any clue about them, such as the world being round. Though men may change their view of the Bible, it does not change. Man is constantly changing his views on many things. Evolution is one of them. There have been many bogus attempts to prove evolution, but they keep changing. The Bible is fact, not theory. They should teach Fact along with evolution theory.
Posted by: AnonymousEvolution's a religion
I don't agree with Evolution because it has not shown me any proof and has only tried to force it on me in the public schools. I like to stick to the facts and where there is a creation there is a creator. Please show me one proof of evolution.
Posted by: AnonymousWAY TRUTH LIFE
By not teaching creationism in schools it has really put a damper on children's view on god. I am a current student and I know that I do not believe in evolution but instead creationism. It is very upsetting that I am forced to learn and and take a test about things that I do not support. I am not asking that science teachers teach about creationism, but instead of taking evolution in the science room, another teacher can teach about creationism and we can take a test on that. I feel that I should not be forced to learn about something I do not believe in. We can learn about all the other religions but not Christianity? It makes no sense to me and I feel that this should be changed. We should be able to come up with a solution and compromise.
Posted by: AnonymousMore widely believed, and just as credible.
It is a commonly believed theory, that has been thought of since the beginning of mankind. In science you need to give every widely supported theory a seat at the table. It has nothing to do with separation of church, and state as it is only being taught not forced, just as evolution is taught not forced. No one has ever been converted by saying....."Many people believe that God or Gods created us".
Posted by: BLAZETV12Neither of these theories has been proven so both are valid.
Education is about giving children the ability to think for themselves not about telling them what to think. Due to this all points of view are valid. Teachers can tell students what various people believe and why and kids can then choose to extend that knowledge to find out for themselves what they believe.
Evolution and creationism are not hard facts like 1 + 1 = 2. By teaching just evolution and not creationism you are also teaching religion in schools, a religion called atheism. Which means your education is no longer secular.
Many people come to realize that both evolution and creationism can exist together and they need not be considered separate entities. Perhaps God did create the universe and gave it the ability to evolve.Posted by: AnonymousYes
Yes because. 1) it is fair for the student because it allows him/her to decide which theory is true. 2) neither belief has been scientifically proven true. 3) the majority of American people do not believe in the theory of evolution. (-cbs news "poll: majority reject evolution" by sean alfano)
Posted by: AnonymousYes, because if your going to teach our kids science theories you ought to give them a choice of belief.
I mean that is what our nation was founded on, freedom of choice. So if you want to teach my kids theories about science then you ought to be teaching creation too. Let them decide! By teaching theories on science and not teaching the theory of creation that is being totally bias as a country. Do we really want our country to have the title of being biased. You want facts right? We'll science isn't the only theory that has facts, creation theory has facts too! So now our country isn't living by what we were founded on freedom of choice, that's okay just give them science, don't let them know all of the facts go ahead no body cares about all of the facts right? Just give them what you believe and not the other facts of creation. That sound totally ok.
Posted by: AnonymousPeople look to put their faith in something.
Creationism is widely known throughout the world. People long to put their faith into something positive, to have something to hope for in the future. If people didn't have faith, hope, desire to push on through life for something better. Where would they be? What would motivate them? The answer is nothing. Children should be taught a theory (just as evolution is a theory) that they can benefit from. Not something that is empty, not offering consolation for life after death.
Posted by: AnonymousI believe we should show all possibilities of the truth
Why would you be completely be biased and only show just one side of the argument and force a student to pay for a private school just to choose their curriculum? Do we not wave the freedom to inquire other possibilities other than Evolution? Without paying 2-3 hundred dollars for a completely different school just for said curriculum.
Posted by: EliteDanWhy one and not the other?
Evolution should not be taught as fact and Creation banned when evolution itself is only a theory! There are so many holes in Evolution and to base discovery on theory and speculation is poor science. They say that teaching Creation may offend other religious students, but what about the force fed Evolution offending the students as well? They say Evolution is unifying and scientific, but this complete rejection of any other theory of creation is not even logical.
Posted by: AnonymousI'm not talking about Sunday school
I believe in a god who created the universe, and a god who created evolution, and a god who Created Jesus. It does not need to be an in depth thing, but a teacher can at least acknowledge that some people believe in creationism over evolution. It's not only Christians who believe in evolution by the way. I wouldn't say "teach" creationism, but don't say that evolution is the only thing that makes sense. People are free to have their own beliefs, and just as teachers can't "preach" to their students, they can't try to make them all atheists.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism and Evolution should BOTH be taught in science classes.
Children should be exposed to both ideas. Although scientists are quick to promote evolution as if it is proven fact, in reality it is a THEORY, and a theory with some pretty significant gaps. Evolutionary scientists have failed to produce undisputed transitional fossil forms to show how organisms evolved from simpler kinds. They are also unable to explain where the first cell came from, and then there's the obvious inconsistency with the big bang theory - how do you get something from nothing? I'm not saying that we shouldn't teach our children evolution - we should. However, we should not present it as undisputed fact. Exposing children to both theories will create a generation of well-rounded, independent thinkers who are able to take two arguments and discern for themselves which makes the most logical sense.
Posted by: AnonymousWhy wouldn't you?
Every time some monkey-brained "genius" comes with a theory about evolution, it's just proven wrong. Besides do you actually on your own free will want to believe that you are a monkey?! I have met more people that tried to prove Jesus and God wrong and then are baptized into Christianity, than the other way around!
Posted by: AnonymousTeaching more than evolution.
In all subjects at school you learn multiple variations and different ways to do it or how to understand it. Teaching creationism is like teaching history, as i saw someone else post. Christianity and other religions is what structured the US and places we live. How can you saw the Pledge of Alligiance and say it under our Heavenly Fathers name but yet be so against it. It is history, we learn about it in school because without it our country would have been built upon other standards. Faith is so important to many. It is what make people who they are, how can you take away something so precious from our lives? Its like food, air and water for us, we need God and the word of God to survive. You cant go off saying no and it isnt real if you have no idea what our faith is about! You do not understand and therefore do not have the right to judge and ASSUME things. Its wrong and you cant make up things that u have no education on. Creationism is important because you see peoples point of views and how and why they are the way they are. Dont take away the most important thing to us.
Posted by: AnonymousBoth are theories
Evolution and creationism are simply both theories! In creationism, an intelligent designer created the world using science. In evolution something came from nothing. Why should one side be taught? The intelligent Designer used science in order to create the earth, placing it at an exact spot for humans to be able to survive. That is the science in creationism. Evolution and creationism have the same evidence its just the difference in our assumptions. Evolution's theory has never been able to be replicated so therefore it is merely a theory. Teaching both sides of these topics in school would present two different sides, let the students decide what they want to believe, but I believe it comes across as unfair to only present one side. Almost like you are trying to hide something if you can't teach the one side but you can teach the other.
Posted by: AnonymousIt is a part of history.
Creationism, along with aspects of all religions, is an aspect of our history as a human race. It has started wars. Religions need to be explained in our schools so that Americans can have a greater understanding of the diverse people around us. Americans of today are close minded and need to be more open minded towards different people.
Posted by: AnonymousOffensive to Atheists, but what about offensive to Christians?
Although creationism is offensive to other religions or atheist; the teaching of evolution or not teaching creationism can actually be offensive to Christians. There is a double standard in the teaching of how our world came to be. During the teaching of evolution, students who believe in a higher power don't have to believe the subject but still need to listen and comprehend it; but why can't atheists listen to the teaching of creationism and not believe the subject either? Though it is only a "belief", it is an alternate solution to the making of our world. By teaching strictly evolution, it is also restricting the students minds to believe in what they want to and make the decision for themselves. For example, if the teacher teaches the lesson of evolution but then teach the idea of creationism, it is giving the student a choice to believe in whichever seems more believable to them.
Posted by: AnonymousIt is hypocritical to teach one theory and discard the other without disproving it.
Science is the organized knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and examination. Obstructing the idea of intelligent design is a hypocritical action; blocking off a theory that has not been disproven would be foolish. And it is argued that evolution in respect to creationism takes more faith to believe its theory.
Posted by: AnonymousYes
People say creationism is a religion, but so is evolution. Evolutionists believe the theory of evolution, creationists believe in creationism. "If creationism is taught then so should other religions." is what the NO people said, but how about evolution? It's a theory, never proven and its believed, therefore it is a religion too.
Posted by: AnonymousSchools should teach creationism and evolution.
I do believe that public schools should teach creationism with evolution in science classes. It is a part of history. Everyone has different beliefs, I don't think that one believe should be forced upon someone. Everyone has their own rights and thoughts. If the child does not want to be taught both then they should be in private school.
Posted by: barbiegirllMy Stance on Evolution & Creation.
I believe that kids need to know about God and the other explanations to how life is the way it is today. Also there should be a choice in whether you want to learn about facts or things that are based on ancient beliefs. Plus there are many people in the world that need to know that there is more than one way to life, two of which are believing in evolution or believing in creation.
Posted by: AnonymousNot teaching both is choosing a side for the students without their knowledge
The majority of the world believes in God. As students, they should be taught the cultural beliefs, the majority and minority beliefs, and the substance of the different theories. Not teaching both is choosing a side for the students without their knowledge. We can only hope parents have given each student a personal foundation. The schools should share the big picture of what traditions, customs, and cultures are a part of our society. We are a global community and our children should be aware of it all.
Posted by: AnonymousShould they be? Maybe. Can they be? Yes.
It isn't about what is true or not true (to an extent.) The people obviously will never come to an agreement on only one side or another, so why not both. Creationism doesn't account for alot of things frankly. But evolution doesn't account for the actual creation of matter. Things just didnt happen. Lighting didn't strike a puddle of mud and boom, single cell organisms (yes i have heard that from some people.) The complexity of the human body or any body for that matter didn't just happen. It may habe been facilitated by a higher power. But to say that no one being did anything for you or watches over you or facilitated your evolution so that you could live is downright selfish. The reproductive system, sight, hearing, anything you can think of didnt just evolve into what it is. Single cells evolve into multicellular organisms. Okay i understand that, that is fine, but explain to me how they devoloped sight or any bodily function. What cells just happened to be mutated to have an eye? None, thats how many. They didnt decide it, God did. We don't know where he came from and neither do you. You don't "know" whether God exists, and neither do we. We can't explain it and we don't have. You can have your facts and statistics and i'll admit, theyre stifling. I've questioned my faith before, and thats what it is: faith. There is theory, and faith; two very different things. Some people say creationism is for the "uneducated." Yes i'm "uneducated" I'm 15, but theres a difference between smart, and educated. I believe in creationism and evolution, or a middle-ground between the two and I call that middle-ground : "Intelligent Design." Call me stupid, denounce my faith, denounce me, but don't tell me I don't know because you don't either. I have faith in my God, and for those of you who think they know there isnt a god or consider yourself "atheist": may God have mercy on your ignorant soul. Both sides can be taught in schools. It's a personal belief as to which you believe in and it's your choice, no the government's.
Posted by: AnonymousGive us both sides to the story...
If schools are going to teach evolution, they should also teach creationism. It is only fair. However, just like sex-ed, you (should) need a parental permission slip signed and returned before you can participate in the topic. I feel that if you are of a faith that supports creationism you should be able to be taught about it without having to pay for another class at your local parish. Another way to get over the challenge is to have students also be taught about the new belief in the Catholic Church of creationism AND evolution coexisting. I think that would be the best option.
Posted by: AnonymousThe school was made to help parents teach their children.
According to a Gallop Poll, 46% of Americans support creationism. If schools abandon the creationist theory, almost half of parental opinion is being ignored.
Both ideas are theory. Neither has been proven to be true. Even though many scientists support evolution, it has many flaws yet to be solved. The creation theory has other flaws. It is therefore unfair and, if I may, politically incorrect to promote one theory and not at least explain the other. Let both be taught, and let the parents of these children further educate them.Posted by: Anonymousif you can force evolution on us, we should be able to force creationism on you
religious equality is nonexistant in america. evolutionists are allowed to force their beliefs on creationist students (i'm one of them) without reproach. if both are taught as theories nobody has to get offended.
Posted by: AnonymousIt would be highly beneficial.
It makes the most sense to show both sides of the coin, just as in any debate. One of the most prudent actions that can be taken is to teach both philosophies to students and allow them to decide which they feel is right. To provide only one ideology is like being brought up in a conservative, evangelical, protestant family: your favorite color is green, has always been green, will always be green, and any other color is absolutely unacceptable. Such radical views are unsafe in a diversified world where it is common to see or come in contact with people who are bound to disagree. It is therefore safe to understand both sides of the argument and perhaps come to a comfortable agreement.
Posted by: AnonymousYes. Macro evolution is as much a religious belief as Creationism.
Secular Humanism believes as strongly in Macro evolution as the staunchist Bible thumper. Even to the point of forbidding scientists/professors who disagree with their faith to publish, even on issues unrelated to either theory.
For those who doubt, look at both sides of this debate on here. Which side is advocating teaching both and letting children decide and which side is full of spittle lipped vitriol, trying to get the other side to shut up and sit down?
The question is phrased wrong. I know of no one who wants a literal 6 day creation taught in science class. Intelligent Design is not only a Christian course of study but also agnostics and atheists as well. It is also a scientific theory, not just on origins but general science, astronomy and all other facets as well. None of those explorations start with "In the beginning God..." because it is outside the sphere of Intelligent Design. As should be "In the beginning wasn't God..." The existence or non-existence of God is outside the purview of science. However, that does not preclude a Designer (one or many), including one evolutionist's theory of Panspermia, where aliens were the Designers. :-)Posted by: AnonymousTrust in God's Word
Evolution is just a theory. We have no solid evidence that evolution happened. Some tests have been done saying they prove evolution but they don't. It is like saying this is a fire, if I put my hand in it will burn and therefore everything else will burn in the fire as well. This isn't the case if we put titanium in the force it wouldn't burn. Schools can't teach a theory that is based in opinions. They should have to teach different ways in which the world was created and this should include creationism.
Posted by: AnonymousTheory is not truth
The fact of the matter is, evolution is an easily disproven "theory" (can't really call it that when a theory is an idea with nothing to disprove it but hasn't enough evidence to be made a scientific law). The fact is that creationism is easily proven, so why subject our children to have a false, impossible idea (evolution) shoved down their throat without putting any actual facts of how our world began, like creationism, in the classroom? Laws of science, like the first and second law of thermodynamics, prove evolution is a croc. We have never found any "in between" creatures - bird to fish, dinosaur to duck, whatever - ever. According to evolution, there should be billions of these, one for every stage of change from one characteristic to the next. There are NONE of those, anywhere. How do you explain symbiotic creatures all over the world - thousands of them? There is so much evidence stacked up against evolution, I'd have to type a book to get it all in. The fact is, we didn't go from the goo to the zoo to you, you aren't the 22nd cousin to the monkey, and there is a meaning to life. Where you see a design, you know there was a designer. And this world is far too perfect, set just right, tilted just right, atmosphere and gravity just right, just far enough from the sun to be warm without being roasted or freezing to death, it's all too perfect to have just randomly happened by accident. All our body systems - digestive, nervous, cardiovascular, limbic, none could survive without all the others - they would've all had to happen at the same time. Its impossible otherwise. So, yes, creationism in schools - the only logical fact of how the Earth and everything and everyone on it came about.
Posted by: AnonymousFrom a student
I am a student in a small town in the Midwest and from that I can say that what is needed is both to be taught. I have found that when both are in a classroom it creates a good debate. This makes both be considered by the other side. I wish that both sides would so this. ONE, stop insulting each other, insulting the other side proves nothing but that youre a jerk. Your point can be proven by kind words and you need not rage and rant to get your point across. This goes for both sides. As a 17 year old I wish that my elders would be a little wiser than me however it is being proven that you are not. So lets play nice, children.
God bless,
A hopeful kid.Posted by: AnonymousWe teach opposing theories on many subjects, why not science?
Why is it when people even mention the idea of Creationism or ID being taught in schools, everyone freaks out? Creationism and ID has evidence, just as Evolution does. People just don't bother to look at it. Several good, well respected scientists believe in Creation today. According to Science Digest: "Scientists who utterly reject Evolution may be one of our fastest-growing controversial minorities… Many of the scientists supporting this position hold impressive credentials in science." If good, respected scientists see Creation on equal footing with Evolution, why shouldn't the schools at least give it a side-note?
Posted by: justin.gravesEVOLUTION OR GOD?
Well yes we should but only to make it fair for students or parents who don't believe in evolution.
Now I myself don't believe in evolution. I am a Catholic who believes exactly what is said in the book of Genesis. I think that it is a religious offence to be teaching Evolution in the classroom, plus it's not even actual, it is still a theory that hasn't had enough evidence to be called fact. But, if you're reading this your are going to be thinking that I'm simply trying to convert everybody and force it on them. But I am not! I'm simply trying to say this. I'm trying to say that the teaching of evolution goes against the constitution that so many people died for to create and protect. In the constitution, it states that there is a separation of church and state. The reason why this is there is to provide no offence in the public school system. But these people say that, we should teach evolution because it is a fundamental part of science and isn't forcing people into Christianity because it's science and there is proof(Even though that it's a theory, not fact.) But, even if you are an atheist which I respect, you have to think about people that have a religion.You're offending them and not only that, you are breaking the amendment about separation of state and church by trying to force evolution and atheism on to our next generation. So now you are wondering, well if there is a separation of state and church, why should we be teaching creationism? Well I'll tell you why, TO MAKE IT FAIR!If people don't believe in evolution, then they should be able to hire a priest of the religion that the student believes in and have he or she teach creationism to the religious children. It's either allow creationism and evolution or ban them both America!Posted by: AnonymousReligious Studies and Mythology Should Also Teach It
Public schools have the awesome responsibility of teaching citizens to think clearly. Whether teaching creationism or capitalism, they must understand not only its current iteration, but also their philosophical roots, their history, their role in culture, and also they must be brought to the place where they can evaluate the science behind they theories and those yet to be developed. The prevalence of HB-5 visas is an indictment of public education where our citizens receive diplomas that do not prepare them to contribute to the national well-being, the common good, or the lives of their families.
Posted by: AuntieCathieevolution is bogus
All "proof" for evolution can be undone by an average 12 year, if they had the facts that public school is holding from them. For exampal, radio metric dating: radio meteric dating is inacurat because it asumes you know specifics about the original matirial. Evolutionasts love it because it is so inacurate, and shows thing are bilions of years old. DNA similarity is also stupid. We are more closely related to ducks and sheep than to apes. Another thing, the geological column is down right dumb! If the genises flood came through, why wouldn't animals be found in layers together. Some animals live closer to the water than others. The lack of proof is the other evidence agains evolution. While creation has sufician evidence, where are the missing links of evolution? Oh that stupid lizard bird the archeopteryx. Well for those of you that haven't herd, that was a hoax. The evolutionasts hushed it up, while they tryed to find solod evidence. It never came. Evolution is so dumb that they have to rely on trickery to hold their theoy up. If this isnt enough for you, read the evolution handbook . Teaching fiction and theories as fact is no way to educate the children in america. If you want your children to be lied to, go head and vote no. But it's on your own head! I believe that God is the answer, not a theory. You have to believe in eternal matter, or an eternal God. And when the evidance is so overwhelming...
Posted by: AnonymousEvolution IS NOT fact
The real truth is that evolution is not fact. There is no hard evidence for evolution. You could argue that point for creation as well, since essentially it all comes down to faith in God, our one and only creator. The science department teaches evolution as factual information, when most of the "facts" come from speculation and hasn't even been proved at all.
Posted by: AnonymousShould public schools teach creationism alongside evolution in science classes?
No, not "ALONGSIDE"! Similar to reading and math, they are two different subjects! Now had the question been, Should public schools teach creationism AS WELL AS evolution in SCHOOL? Then, my answer would have been, YES!
I feel that creationism should be taught in history class not science. When we say "creationism", we instantly think of "God", right? When we say God, we instantly think of "The Bible", right? The Bible is a "historical" book, right? Why not teach our kids, about both subjects! IT WOULDN'T HARM US, BUT HELP US GAIN A BETTER UNDERSTANDING!Posted by: AnonymousIt isn't about religion but its about relationship
God doesn't create crime. Bad things occur in our lives because we are sinful people. I believe that God created the world because 1) it makes more sense than any other idea when you look into it and 2) the bible is a reliable source. Let me explain: When looking at evolution it would take a lot more faith to believe that eventually the chance or an organism developing and surviving than there being a creator to make everything. Plus when we look at it, we aren't gaining development but actually losing information in our genes (such as less redheads in the world). Also the bible has been proven more and more to be reliable thinks to finding the Seven Dead Scrolls and the book of Isaiah being all acurate to today's text. Plus if the bible wasn't true then there would be over 30 authors that were considered crazy.
Posted by: AnonymousUntil
there is a textbook with the guts to publish the "fact" of evolution i believe that all plausible theories should be taught.
Posted by: AnonymousYou say religion is not factual, evolution is?
How is evolution anymore factual than creationism? Its simply not! If you want to just believe what scientists say, then take into mind that there are many scientists that are for creationism. Not only are they with it but the have so much more evidence on how were created by a God. Evidence that makes the evolution theory seem as foolish as it truly is. If we come from monkeys, then why are there still monkeys today? Why don't those monkeys eventually turn into a human "such as we did"? BECAUSE ITS FALSE. Does a new born baby stay a new born baby? Of course not,it carefully and beautifully grows into an adult, so why don't monkeys? In the 1940's the united states bombed Hiroshima, Japan. Complete destruction left as the outcome. Yea there very possibly may have been a big bang, where stars collided, but that is all it was, just an explosion, nothing beautiful can come from something meant for complete destruction. A big explosion is all the big bang was. Read the Bible, it lists multiple events that have and are to happen. Now the Bible, made thousands of years ago, predicting things that would happen in the future(of that time) that have already happened now? What would you call that? Coincidence? No, not at all. Even scientists who support evolution agree that there was a man who was pronounced dead for three days, rose and lived again, now how is that SCIENTIFICALLY possible without some sort of upper power? Its not...
Posted by: AnonymousHistory Lesson Tip
Before the Scopes Monkey Trial, Evolution was just as illegal to teach as Creationism is today. Secondly the American Civil Liberties Association deliberately hired Johnathon Scopes to teach Evolution to the the Tennessee school so that he would be arrested and was also told to plead guilty. Why? So that the ACLA would be able to press a case to legalize the teaching of evolution and discredit Creationism. Thirdly, Science has proven that spontaneous generation cannot exist. Yet in order for evolution to be true Life must come from lifelessness. If you are Not willing to accept God as the designer at least look at the facts and understand their is an intelligent design in life even if it may not be God.
Posted by: AnonymousAs creativity is needed in all fields, public schools should teach creationism along with evolution in science classes.
Yes, I do completely agree that public schools should teach creationism in science classes along with the evolution. As creativity is needed in all fields, public schools should teach things related to creativity along with evolution in science classes.
Posted by: expiredxsoulIts not fair
If they can teach evolution, why cant they teach creationism? I do not believe in evolution so if I have to sit through classes about it, then others should sit through classes on creationism. It wont kill them to hear a little bit from a different side of the story. What about freedom of speech? I cannot even sing the word Jesus or God in my chorus songs. I do not agree with just teaching evolution. Its not fair.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism should be taught alone
There is proof to support creationism, but not evolution. Evolution is wrong and is illogical. Creationism can explain everything. Jesus' resurrection alone proves everything. He was hung on a cross and died. He definitely died. No doubt about it. He was buried and rose again 3 days later. Over 500 people saw him. About the earth being "millions of years old", if God could create a mature man, why couldn't he create a mature earth? Creationism makes perfect sense if you understand it. God has revealed himself to some, not others. God picks who understands.
Posted by: AnonymousBeing Educated, not Indoctrinated
Both of these beliefs are scientifically unprovable. No one was there to witness the origin of man occurring, therefore it is reasonable to present our children both sides of the argument. As far as I know, not one individual has seen evolution happen with their own eyes so its not more valid than any other theory of how we came to be. Id be inclined to conclude that peoples fear of teaching them side by side is due to fear of exploiting a faulty theory in evolution that holds no water.
Posted by: AnonymousUnbiased Presentation of Views
Public schools should teach creationism because it will then not just choose one view over another. If schools taught both, then many Christians and other creationists would not be offended by the one sided view. Schools would also be allowing students to form their own opinion after they see both sides of how the world was made.
Posted by: Anonymousit's constitutional
1. Our country was founded under God, the Creator.
2. Teaching only evolution does not support the diverse beliefs of the students.
3. Evolution has no real historical evidence
4. How will students be able to choose what to believe for themselves when the only thing they have been taught is evolution? How will they know that creationism is right or wrong? they need to know about other theories so that they are able to see why they believe what they do, or to explain to someone with an opposing opinion why they are wrong.Posted by: AnonymousEvolution and Creation are both just theories
Until scientists can prove that evolution is a fact, not a theory, creation should be taught alongside it in schools. By teaching them both major theories, they will be presented with both beliefs and can choose what to believe on their own.
Posted by: Anonymousdefinitely!
I'm currently a student, and I think that the curriculum nowadays is very narrowminded. They need to give us options and let us decide for ourselves.
Posted by: one1d57Yes, but not advertising it as the one definitive proof
While, of course, it would be wrong for schools to "brainwash" children into going along with Christian faiths, they still need to be shown the whole story. To make good decisions they need to see both sides of the argument; teaching only about Evolution is just as bad. Children need to be taught to make their own decisions and teaching creationism alongside evolution would allow them to do just that.
Posted by: JegoryTheory Must First Be Proven in Order to Be Considered Factual
By definition, a theory is not factual. Even Darwin acknowledged that evolution is a theory that has not yet been factually validated. I am a realist, not a creationist. And the sad reality is that what we are taught in public school is not always accurate. But people still want to believe what their teachers tell them. Bottom line is that evolution is just one unproven theory. If you claim to be conducting a true scientific inquiry, how can you deny discussion of a different theory? Much of the discussion here reveals that the commentators have strongly held beliefs that have not yet been subjected to rational analysis.
Posted by: AnonymousOur Children Should Know
Our kids should know both sides to how humans came about. Children are starting to believe that we evolved from animals and others believe we evolved from god. And the other students are torn what to believe in because of religion and school. Even though our kids don't have to believe that our world was created by god don't matter they should know and pick what they want to believe. Instead of forcing them to believe in one thing to pass a class.
Posted by: AnonymousI believe in personal choice
I was raised Roman Catholic and to believe every single word of Genesis and anything else is blasphemy. Well, like every other human, if you tell me not to do or believe something that is all I want to do. So, I started asking questions and educating myself on creationism. I am not going to go into my personal stance, I just think everyone should at the very least know all the options and choose for themselves.
Posted by: AnonymousCreation should be taught
Why students are taught evolution is beyond me. Schools do not teach creation because it is offensive to those who do not believe it, or because "it interferes with the first amendment". The first amendment says that the government can not establish a national government or prohibit others from freely worshiping. If evolution is a "theory" then so should creationism be. The school is not forcing any one to believe in creation, simply that it's a possibility of how we got here.
Posted by: AnonymousTheories are Theories
Although it would seem as though a myth, creationism is nothing more but a theory like all the others. We, in biology and Earth life and space science classes, shove the evolution theory down our students throats when the truth is, scientists aren't 100 percent sure if it's true. We teach our children about Greek myths, we teach them Indian and Native American folk tales; but not once have I seen any teacher tell them the story of David and Goliath, or of Jonah and the Whale. If people argue all the time that these stories are myths what's the harm in learning from them? After all, it gives us a historical insight on old-world societies and especially in such foreign countries such as the Middle East, where we seem to have so much towards xenophobia from them. It may be taught in either history, science, or English classes and fit perfectly into the curriculum. You people who spend so much time battling a God you don't think exists, you don't realize the insanity of your actions. There is no way you can be ignorant if you listen to both sides; debaters always argue that Christians don't have an "open-mind" that they don't understand it's them who aren't listening. You should at least let your children listen to both sides and let them make up their own minds, or else we all know who the "single-minded" people are. It's terrifying the percentage of "no's" on this argument it makes me wonder what kind of world our children will be living in...
Posted by: 1hazel1blueFairness versus Truth
I think that even though there is no living eye witnesses to Biblical text, or other religions, they should still be an option for those who want to choose it. Back then, people were taught that electrons were part of the nucleus, and then information changed and people taught different things. Nothing is ever concrete except change itself, so why not be fair about it. People hate schools for all the required stuff that they don't care about that they have to learn. If religion is taught in school, in a science class or otherwise, people might get a brighter attitude towards learning. Based on the popularity of this topic, and atleast 90% of the world believes in some form of religion, this is a beneficial change. Even though some people who don't believe in religion feel like they are helping people by limiting it, it just isn't fair.
Posted by: BurchaleEvolution is a theory (not fact).
Many of the comments left in support of evolution state evolution as a "proven" fact, and creation as an unproveable theory. The fact is, evolution is just as much of a theory as creation. Nobody witnessed creation and it cannot be reproduced in a laboratory. Likewise, nobody witnessed evolution and it cannot be reproduced in a lab. Therefore they are both theories; nobody was there. Even Darwin did not believe his hypothesis to be a fact. He perfectly understood that his theory was indeed just that, a theory.
Many of the pro-evolution comments left here state that there is no evidence for creationism. They have obviously not explored the possibility. That's just the problem. Our students are being taught science from a limited, biased standpoint. They are not given the chance to apply their sense and logic and decide the matter for themselves, but rather they are programmed by the public schools to believe evolution. A free society allows people to investigate all possibilities and use their knowledge to determine what is true.
In response to condescending remarks made by evolutionists stating that their hypothesis is so much more "factual" than ours: Consider the fact that no evolutionist has ever answered the question of where did the first organism that blew up causing the "big bang" come from. If it came from another organism that had the same thing happen to it before. Where did that one come from? Evolution claims to explain the beginning of life, but that's just the part they struggle with, the very beginning.Posted by: AnonymousBoth creationism and evolution should be taught in public schools.
The idea of giving kids an education is not only to teach them subjects such as math and science, but also to teach them to be able to think on their own. Teaching students only one side of the theory of how human life began is biased. You must give the students multiple points of view so that they can make their own judgment.
Posted by: AnonymousIt's your choice.
I think that you should have a choice in the matter whether you want to study evolution or The Bible. It would stop all this mess and confusion in the first place. Everybody will be happy. It is a simple solution to a big problem and you can learn about both.
Posted by: AnonymousBoth evolution and creationism have good points, and learning both offers a new view into life on Earth.
Most people seem put off by the idea of both evolution and creationism being taught at school, but I don't see why. Both offer a very distinct view into how people came to be on Earth, and both have points that the other can't match or explain. Both are believed by large groups of people who think that their way is correct. I am currently a student learning about evolution and I am simply saying that the best way for students to learn about it is to offer both and allow students, such as myself, to pick one, the other, or both. Students can then decide for themselves whether they believe in evolution or creationism, and not have someone decide it for them.
Posted by: AnonymousEqual opportunity for all
Whether creationism or evolution is the right answer does not matter, what matters is that there are two different ideas. Therefore both should be taught and then the decision as to which is true or false be left in the students hands. Hate is not something that is caused by conflict, conflict is merely the by product of hate.
Posted by: AnonymousYou can't prove anything.
Neither Creationism, nor Evolution can be proved. Students should not be pressured into one choice or the other, but should be presented with the two leading beliefs and allowed to explore them further if they so desire. It is not fair for students to be presented a bias and one sided view.
Posted by: purplefries18Both evolution and creationism should be taught in schools.
Evolution and creationism are both historical sciences, not operational science. If one view or theory is taught then both should be taught and the children given the opportunity to come to their own conclusions. This would also teach the children to learn critical thinking. If only evolution is taught and not creationism, then it is forced information, or brainwashing.
Posted by: AnonymousWhy are people allowed to teach evolution and not creation??
There is one comment on here that really annoyed me. If all of the people who believe in evolution knew what they were talking about, they would know that evolution is just a theory and IS NOT a proven fact. Do any of you evolution believers know that scientists say that they age rocks based on the age of fossils and they base the age of fossils on the age of rocks. You can't "find the age" of one of the things if you don't know the age of the other. This is just proving your "fact" that the world is billions of years old wrong. Also if the world was billions of years old the moon would have more craters on the side that is facing the Earth but it only has a few which proves that the world is NOT as old as evolution believers say. Lastly, if the Earth did come from a big bang then all of the planets and moons would be spinning in the same direction due to the gravity and pressure during the explosion, but they're NOT! I'm sorry for going on a rant guys but I don't think that it is fair that schools have to teach evolution (excluding private schools)! Why can schools press their beliefs of evolution on Christians but Christians can't even bring up the idea of teaching a tiny bit of Creationism in the school lessons. If you guys don't want us pressing our beliefs on you don't press your beliefs on us.
Posted by: mruth2015We should not be forced.
I grew up with a Catholic faith through my family outside my education.. why should it be fair that if I was at a school that forced science as fact when I believed otherwise? I thought science was the biggest waste of time and barely passed any related subject, which is a negative impact on my personal education as I could have spent more time in classes that fueled my passion. If there are many like minded like me and want to learn more about my faith in an environment where I spent most of my time growing up, school, I should not be denied a choice. I'd rather have both avenues made possible, and people given that choice. Look at the other side of the coin, you're science driven and school forced you to study creationism and banned all science. Put yourself in the perspective of today's education where science is commonly taught.
Posted by: AnonymousYes, precisely because evolution has all the proof.
It's very simple. Evolution has a monopoly on proof. Anybody who believes otherwise is a walking indictment of our public school system. Do the homework, guys, and you'll find the evidence to support creationism is ridiculously stupid.
As such, I want creationism taught in science classes, precisely because evolution has all the proof. It will educate kids about what science looks like and what pseudoscience looks like. It will teach them critical thinking and how to recognize stupidity at a glance. Creationism, as a great example of pseudoscience, can be a great tool in a science classroom.Posted by: Anonymouse123eEvolution does not have any proof.
There is no upstanding evidence that says that evolution is real. It is constantly being changed to fit the evidence that we find. Example one: we have not found ANY intermediate links. NONE. Example two: nothing in neo-Darwinian or Darwinian beliefs can explain the Cambrian explosion. It is too short of a time for natural selection to take place.
Posted by: christian777Evolution is still a theory.
The teachers of our day are doing students a great disservice by only teaching about evolution. It essentially makes the students unaware of the view of creation. From an academic standpoint, creationism needs to be taught because it expands the learning of an individual. Whether creation is correct or incorrect is not the point in this argument. We should present all aspects in every subject; not just the aspects that we believe. Let the students decide for themselves what they want to believe. Make them think. Make them work. If teachers keep telling them what to believe and think, then they will contribute less than their maximum potential to society. Tell a student one side of the story and he will believe it without question. Tell him both sides of the story and he will believe one by proving, to himself, how the other is false.
Posted by: AnonymousIt could be taught as a theory along with evolution
Creationism may be based on circular logic and based on God, but isn't that better than teaching our children that we come from apes? There is absolutely no proof that we do. It's a theory. So what's wrong with teaching creationism as a theory in schools to give our children a choice in what to believe?
Posted by: AnonymousGod
We should have a choice to choose to learn about faith if we want. We should be able to choose what we learn about in school. I don't like being forced to take science and learn about evolution. I want to learn about what I believe. I want a class where its okay to pray and learn about the bible.
Posted by: AnonymousThis isn't about our beliefs, it's about our future as a nation.
The nation we live in has many bright minded youth that our going to be the future of this country. We need to open their minds, make them think, think critically, and decide fot themselves, so that they can make their own decisions in their lives. We can't just control their lives and not let them learn how to make decisions because if they do not learn to think for themselves, to be themselves, to become leaders, then the USA is going to end up just like every great civilization in history. All great civilizations bring their own demise. And that is exactly what we are doing to ourselves. We are tearing our nation apart, and hurting our future. We need to engineer great generations to come so that America will become an even greater country than it is today. To become a world leader in all that we do. To become critical thinkers. I myself am an evolutionist. But we can't sacrafice the future of this country and the youth of this country because we don't belive in creation. We need to open these children's minds to make them think, be themselves, start a movement, become a LEADER. The future of this nation depends on the decisions we make now. We will effect the USA in one way or another down the road. We want that effect to be posotive. I'm not saying that we force an Islamic student to learn about creation and learn about the Christian God. Lets give our children a choice in classes, one that teaches creation, and one that doesn't. Let our children make their own decisions, become strong-minded individuals. Let them become the future of the nation that they too live in, and start now, leading the nation that we one day will no longer be here to run.
Posted by: AnonymousTo the people against "Jesus Freaks"
You do realize that most other countries laugh at us not because of religion, but because of our education level and all the fat foods we eat, right? Most other countries have some form of God, so if they laughed at us, it would be like laughing at themselves as well. It's people who insult others for believing in a God that should be shamed from their children. Anyway, I feel like both should be taught because both could be true.
Posted by: AnonymousEvolution is considered a "belief" just like creationism.
It just isn't considered a "religion" as well. I've believed in God my whole life, so of course I'll take this side of the argument, because I believe that God saves people and lives. But I don't think that it should be "taught" in public schools, just mentioned in order to give students who are religions a better chance of not being bullied in school. studies have shown that religious students are bullied by other students who believe in evolution. the main reason for this being that students who believe in evolution sometimes consider religious students "uneducated." There have been cases of this all over the US for years.
Posted by: AnonymousYES!
Creationism isn't proven, yes. But neither is evolution. Natural selection and speciation are tested and proven, but the THEORY of evolution is not. Teaching only one or the other is not fair to us, the students, because it doesn't give us the opportunity to use our brains and think independently, like schools are encouraging us to do. The reason we don't teach creationism in school is because the proof of it is in the bible, which apparently is not a reliable source?? But this argument is ridiculous and hypocritical, because evolution isn't proven anywhere. People have conducted experiments proving that overtime, we adapt to our differing environments. But to say that we evolved from nothing but lumps of matter is crazy. Brain cells and the immune system, and respiratory, etc. are far to specialized to just be adaptions from nothing. There had to be some intelligent design. Regardless of what you believe though, it is not our job to shove opinions into the brains of students and call them fact when thy're not. They need to be able to learn about both sides, and decide for themselves.
Posted by: AnonymousI would have to say yes
There are a lot of interesting responses on both sides. The problem I have as I read through many of the responses are the number of people who attack creationism or evolution and not the original question of whether or not it should be taught in a science class.
As a person in education I do believe it has its place in school as students are curious about things and want to be knowledgeable, and can often be misinformed about about what they know as fact.
For those against I offer some thoughts on your responses. The issue of science being fact and creation, or a creator, being a myth seems to be at the core. For example "There is no literal truth to the Bible" yet it is used in the Archaeological field as reliable source to find lost cities based on exact biblical accounts and maps, there are also historical documents and writings from other civilizations that support the very things written in the bible.
When it comes to "Evolution is fact" the problem with that is that science continues to change as we evolve (ex. the earth flat,earth is the center of the universe, and new changes in scientific thought today) What will 100 years bring in what science does or doesn't know as fact.
If we take science as the proof of whether something is or isn't true we see in science that there is a Law of Physics called the 1st Law of Thermodynamics. It states that there cannot be an increase or decrease in matter in the universe, therefore matter cannot be created from nothing. So how did it get there? Science itself lends to a creator of such a beautiful creation.
Im no expert but these are just a few things that lead me to say it does have a place in schools and could be taught in a science class. Just a few of my thoughts.Posted by: AnonymousEvolution is not true
Often raised against evolution is the concept that life cannot come from non-life. Now lets set aside the fact that this has nothing at all to do with biological evolution, which is the discussion of changes in existing life. Do creationists not realize that that in order to be a creationist, you must also believe that life came from non-life? The lowest form of Creationist will occasionally, in a fit of ignorance, exclaim "We didn't evolve from rocks!" while the slightly more cognizant variety will make the same claim however they will dress it up with slightly less ridiculous language such as "abiogenesis is impossible".
According to Genesis, humans were made out of dust, non-living material. So we have two theories: Scientific Abiogenesis and Theological Abiogenesis.
Scientific Abiogenesis (and keep in mind I'm a philosophy major, not a biologist so I might not have the best grasp of this concept) claims that very basic amino acids and proteins formed in the primordial ooze billions of years ago, and over the course of many millions of years and incremental, tiny changes formed incredibly simple organisms that slowly became more complex due to mutation.
Theological Abiogenesis claims God breathed on dirt and a fully functional human popped into existence.
Now at this time I will make no claim as to which one is true or false, I merely want to raise the point that when a Creationist claims that that Scientific Abiogenesis is ridiculous, the only alternative is a scenario that is many orders of magnitude more unbelievable. In what kind of mind is the latter of these two MORE logically sound then the former?
Both theories are essentially the same: Life came from inorganic material. However the Creationist theory also presupposes the existence of a preexisting INCREDIBLY complex intelligence, with no explanation or description of either the origin of this complex intelligence OR the processes it used to create life.
So why do creationists insist on Claiming abiogenesis is impossible? Their theory is BASED on a form of abiogenesis far less logical then the scientific theory of abiogenesis.Posted by: AnonymousYes
Creationism is a theory describing how the world, as we know it, came to be. Evolution is a theory describing how the world, as we know it, came to be. Neither theory has been proved or disproved; either theory has the possibility of being partially, or completely, true. It is responsible and desirable that the scientists and theologians of tomorrow are educated about both theories.
Posted by: AggieBby far
creationism is a widly argued topic but it comes down to two things Evolution is not a proven fact yet they teach it like it is. I believe that creationism is a science. They explain everything that evolution does and even more. There are vallid explainations as to why it is not taught in school.
Posted by: mckinneycoolYES!
There is some good supporting evidence for creationism and the fact that so many people think that it is just from the bible shows people need to be better educated on the subject.
Posted by: badbobGive the children choices
Present it as "some people say this" and explain where each view comes from.
Posted by: BennyWCreationism should be taught in public schools
Creationism should be taught in public schools because children should have different points of view then they should make their own decisions on whether they choose to believe in creationism or in evolution.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is just as much a possiblity!
I think both should be taught and the child make his or her own mind up. When I was in college science was my major...and I think creationism is highly likely. Evolution has too many unanswered questions. Not one fossil has been found to prove that evolution has truly happened. Where are the animals that are in the midst of evolving???? No fossiles to support it.
Posted by: AnonymousSchools should teach both sides of the argument it is biased to teach only evolutionism.
When schools teach only evolutionism it seems like they are trying to push that point on children. Many people don't believe in evolutionism and they actually believe in creationism. Families are pushed away from schools due to this fact. It just seems like the public education system isn't open to showing both sides and letting children make their own choices between the two.
Posted by: B3rkIffyCreationism is one theory of the beginning of the world so it should be taught.
All theories regarding the beginning of the world should be taught to students. Students shouldn't be fed information. They should be given all of the theories and decide for themselves what they believe in. Since it would be a science class, the instructor could focus on evolution; but he or she should still expose the students to the other options.
Posted by: VasilBuddyThere is scientific evidence.
More and more scientific evidence for a creator is being found, and considered in the scientific community. Evolution in itself is becoming a religion because the scientific "evidence" they have for it is flawed, outdated, or even inaccurate. Intelligent design (creationism) is becoming accepted by scientists around the world because the evidence for it is irrefutable.
Posted by: AnonymousYes
All theories should be considered. Both take the evidence and explain it through their world views. Evidence is continually emerging for creation as well as being debunked for evolution. We should be encouraging good healthy discussion not stifling it; isn't that what they did in the dark ages?
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is the belief that god created everything.
Evolution is just a theory as well, it can not be proven. Therefore it is just an argument against creationism. So why would it be acceptable to teach evolution in a public school and not creationism. In my opinion, by teaching evolution, you are trying to persuade my children that our god did not create everything base on some "scienc?" That can not be proven.
Posted by: Anonymous
Stick to the facts.
The facts are, evolution is fact. Sorry guys and girls, but if you have not figured it out by now you're just being ignorant of the facts. It's not hard to prove and you can see the results yourself,there is really no excuse . Schools should stick to the facts and not feel pressured to lie to people.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism should be taught in RE.
The definition of a theory is a hypothesis (a prediction based on fact) supported by experiments to confirm the hypothesis. There isn't evidence to make creationism a scientific theory. Therefore it shouldn't be taught as a scientific fact. This doesn't mean that people cant believe in creationism if they want to.
Posted by: AnonymousDarwin didn't even believe in his own theory
look stuff up before you say something is FACT WHEN ITS NOT. its so sad to see all you lost people in the world at lest we know were going to heaven not hell i love who i am and what i am and am happy to not to be one of you guys that vote no
Posted by: ajgerthCreationism is Imaginary
There is absolutely no evidence supporting the creation of the world or its inhabitants. The only thing that has led us, as the human race, to believe such a thing is a story. A story that has been changed many, many, MANY times since it was first produced.
No one has ever witnessed or proven creationism. Evolution can be observed, studied and proven.Posted by: DeadzoneFact not fairytales
No matter how many people believe something, or how much they want it to be true, it does not change the fact of evolution. It's as much a 'theory' as gravity is. Examine all creation myths in a literature/religious setting, but it doesn't deserve to be on the same platform as real science.
Posted by: AnonymousJust because you "Believe in it" doesn't make it true.
Religion is not fact. It provides no evidence for it self and instead yells at us like a three year old to believe in it or else. It is not science, it is a pseudoscience. Like alchemy is to chemistry. It isn't History either. Just because a few events line up correctly in the bible, doesn't mean the rest of the bible is true. Keep the facts in school and keep your religious BS in your own darn church. If you really want to teach creationism in the class room, we get to teach science in the churches.
Posted by: wickedcorIt is wrong....
Public schools are exactly what they sound like, public. Someone's personal view of God should not be taught in school to children. If their parents wish for that then they should take them to Sunday school where that is all they teach. Children should not be influenced religiously by school, unless it is parochial.
Posted by: k44Creationism has failed to withstand the test of time and need to get out of the way in order for progression and rationalism to takeover.
Evolution has been proved on scientific fact and is supported by an abundance of proof while creationism is based on faith alone. Creationism has failed to withstand the test of time and need to get out of the way in order for progression and rationalism to takeover. Evolution has a lot of supporting facts including: radioactive decay dating, fossil records, similarities in genetic code among multiple species, geological formation, etc. the list is truly endless. Creationism, although a belief held by billions throughout thousands of years, has lost it's credibility as something that should be enforced into the educational system. I, personally, respect the belief and someone's right to hold it, however, I have to disagree with it.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is not a science
Creationism has no scientific foundation to it whatsoever. It is found in a book which a group of people choose to believe, with absolutely zero historical or biological evidence to support it. Creationism is a far fetched belief routed in religion. Evolution is a scientific theory backed by evidence and experiment.
Posted by: AnonymousDon't do either.
Keep all religion out of public school lessons, which includes evolution, which is atheist. Keep that from brainwashing kids. Let the kids decide on their own what religion they want to have without the schools swaying their opinion! It is not the government's decision whether kids believe in creationism or evolution. By the way, there is proof that creationism exists... THE BIBLE!
Posted by: AnonymousYou cannot teach creationism as fact.
You simply should not be allowed to teach something that has long been proven false as a fact. Religion was used in the past to explain what we had not known, by shoving shoving gods or magic into the gaps in the current knowledge. However if we wish to progress as a race and to further advance our knowledge of the universe then we must let go of the supernatural claims that are shoved into the gaps of knowledge. Also the existence of Evolution has proven to be a fact but the process of it still remains a theory.
Posted by: AnonymousAbsolutely no way!
Creationism is not science! Creationism is only based on faith and the faith of Fundamentalists that is it there's science to it whatsoever! On the other hand we have Evolution by Natural Selection. Evolution is a fact now, scientists are only discussing specific species on who cam first and who's ancestor is that. Evolution has withstand the test and time and there is mountains of evidence in the Fossil Records and the study of Genetics have shown that we are all descendants of a common ancestor! Creationism should not and will not be taught in public schoosl!
Posted by: 621infamousThere's no proof.
A science classroom should teach science and only science. Evolution has loads of support behind it whereas the only "proof" for creationism comes from a likely false book written centuries ago with no scientific backing whatsoever. If I ever went to a school where a teacher tried to teach creationism I would think they were an idiot and would immediately lose all respect for them.
Posted by: AnonymousKeep church out of public education
Evolution is a scientific fact. Creationism is a religious stance from christians - it does NOT belong in schools funded by the government. That's what private schools are for, sadly.
Posted by: deedeeiamIgnorance is not on equal footing with knowledge.
Reading the "yes" arguments it's pretty obvious they have no idea how evolution even works, or even what 'theory' means in scientific context. Scientific illiterates should have no say in what goes on in science class.
Posted by: sonatano8Creationism belongs in Religious Studies classes
The curriculum of science classes should be decided by scientists. Since there is no real debate about evolution among scientists, it has ceased to be "just one alternative". It is no longer a hypothesis but a scientific theory, with as much evidence as the Theory of Gravity. US schools risk falling behind the rest of the developed world if they continue to teach creationism.
Posted by: OrwellNO. NO. NO.
Creationism is a hoax! Hoax! There are NO scientific evidence associated on how Earth was made based on bible so why bother lying to the students who are supposed to learn the evidenced facts? If students want to learn about creationism, they can take a religion classes, private classes, church classes, tutorials, and so many other options. Creationism and Evolutionism are two COMPLETELY opposite definitions and except that only one of them has an evidence to support while other was just like a "drawn up story" for bible.
Posted by: WheelSchool is for education not fairy tales.
There is already a place people that believe in nonsense to go to "learn" about magic and that place is church. Children go to school so they can be taught real things. It would just be confusing to most kids to have a teacher explain evolution then follow up with "...or everything could have just magically popped into existence, you choose." We already have enough unintelligent people in this country and that won't help matters.
Posted by: twistedfaithCreationism in whose respect?
Creationism is not science. It is not a scientific theory, let alone a hypothesis. You can't test a deity, just like you can't test fairies or other mystical creatures. Creation mythology is already taught in mythology class. It's like asking should World History be taught in Math class?
Posted by: AnonymousNo way lol
The only proof for creationism lies in the bible, which is in no way a credible source. Information based on mysticism and not fact has no place in a child's mind
Posted by: 1kevintsuiCreationism has been disproven
There is more evidence for evolution than there is for gravity. If creationism is taught, we will be lying to children and subverting their educations. I mean, why not teach astrology alongside astronomy, and alchemy alongside chemistry, and the stork theory of childbirth?
Posted by: teachbeachCreationism is strictly religious.
And the Constitution forbids the endorsement and indoctrination of religious studies in state run schools. Creationist like to say that they have evidence backing them up. Yet the only evidence are either conspiracies or outliers. Schools teach observations and critical thinking, which indisputably lead to evolution as the most likely answer.
Posted by: BullishTo the yes opinions-
"if you can force evolution on us, we should be able to force creationism on you" is why there should be more "no" votes....
Posted by: AnonymousWhy bother?!
If you conclude the world was created by a deity then what more is there to add onto the damn argument? GOD DID IT THE END! Go to a Church, Mosque, Temple and learn about whatever creationism you want to. School is meant for reality. not some fairy tale.. Have fun
Posted by: Anonymousteach the truth
if you are going to teach about myth then they should teach about every single religion out there and then nobody would actually learn anything but a bunch of fairy tales instead of something important.
Posted by: Rainbow_dashIts science class
If this were a religion class or even a philosophy class it would be a different matter. Of course spiritual ideas should be taught in order to create a cultured person. It is different however, to say that creationism is science. Science is all about logic and reactions. There is no logical way that a reactant (God) could produce a reaction (everything) on top of that we can carbon date bones and even the oldest "human" bones don't come within centuries of dinosaurs, it just didn't happen
Posted by: NickWydenTeach the truth
People are entitled to there own opinions not there own facts. Allowing creationism in a classroom when it's not being taught as mythology is dishonest and a disservice to our youth.
Posted by: AnonymousIgnorance Is Not Equal To Science
Science classes teach science, if you argue that creationism is a valid argument to the theory of evolution then you clearly don't understand evolution. If people want to learn about creationism, go to a church or a religion class, not a class that teaches science with facts, evidence, and credible theories.
Posted by: FitchUntil there is evidence to support creationism..
Then religion should be left out of schools. Because that really is what creation theory is at this point, a religious myth. Sure, it could be true, but on the other hand, if you're going to teach a science class, you damn well better teach things that are scientifically testable, supportable, falsifiable, and all of those other -able's that go along with the scientific method.
Posted by: AnonymousYour "some people say this" response is stupid.
The whole "some people say this" argument that you jesus freaks keep spitting out as a way to present it is stupid. If you do that than you have to say that in everything you teach:
When you teach about the moon landing are you gonna say some people say that it didn't happen and we should respect that?
When you teach about JFK are you gonna say some people say that there was another shooter at the grassy knoll?
When you teach about the post war period, are you gonna mention aliens at roswell?
No, you're not because all those things are stupid, but not nearly as stupiid as thinking that human beings and dinosaurs walked on the earth at the same time, or that everyone on earth is descended from two people who had two sons.
Stop making our country look stupid, other countries are laughing of us and it's your fault. We are not all stupid but people like you who think that creationism is a valid idea are giving us a bad reputation. Believe what ever you wanna believe but don't teach your kids that crap, you're doing them a disservice. And I hope they grow up and never speak to you again, leaving you to die alone and sad waiting to go to heaven and then not going because it doesn't exist.Posted by: AnonymousYou need to give all the stories if you give one
Evolution is a fact. There is loads of evidence for it. I respect other people's beliefs; the only problem is that if you teach the Christian story of creation, you need to also teach all the other stories of origin or else it is discriminatory. For example, a kid who is Hindu needs to listen to the story of creation of the Christians more so than the one of his own religion. But the only rational explanation for the origin of species is evolution. It is the most likely theory.
Posted by: blablablaNo, public schools should not teach creationism in science classes, because creationism is not a science subject.
Creationism is not a science. It is a belief shared by many that mankind came about in a manner that excludes evolution. Since it is not a science, it has no place in a science class in public schools, or any other school for that matter. Creationism could however be taught in public schools, in a separate class, which would cover all religions.
Posted by: NWinterssay NO
Hey, if we're going to teach debunked theories, why not do other explanations for how the Earth got here? Like the Hindu, Sikh, or Greek myths? Why not the Egyptian myth while we're at it? Lol, there are some things we can't let children chose for themselves b/c we're assuming that they'll act in a reasonable manner even though we know their (by their I mean our, because I am a "child") brains are not fully developed.We do not need children learning false information throughout their lives. What they do need are proven facts, backed up by what's literally a mountain of evidence. And to those wondering, evolution CAN be experimented. Just look it up on the internet or any biology textbook. It's not that hard.
Posted by: AnonymousTHE FIRST AMENDMENT
Creationism is the Christian mythology of how the universe/world was created. Public schools are state run and state funded. The First Amendment does not allow the state government to establishment or preferences of any religious view over another. Each religion has differing creation myths. To make it mandatory to teach Abrahamic Monotheistic Creationism in any government funded school over any other form of creation is in direct violation of the First Amendment of the United States constitution. Science is based on questioning, theorizing, testing, and observation. Creation does not fall into this category of education. However, this does not prohibit the State from providing an optional, elective, non-required course on creation, with the caveat that all variants of creation must be surveyed and exposed and "taught" to the students equally.
Posted by: AnonyFelineScience class should teach actual science
When support for creationism can be found using the scientific method (good luck), then it can be taught alongside other well-substantiated theories.
Posted by: AnonymousThat would be like teaching that brown cows make chocolate milk....
Just because you label something a theory, say its possible without any real reason does not make it credible. What is the point of education if we are going to teach fairy tales as theory. Next we will teach "Through the Looking Glass" in a class on the physics of alternate dimensions in string theory?
Posted by: jackintoshEvidence.
The fossil record, DNA records and all other evidence supports evolution. On the flip-side the only evidence of creation is a thousands year old myth from a people who were largely intolerant, without the scientific method and incapable of understanding basic concepts like germ theory or zero. Therefore it would be detrimental to the formation of the minds of children if we were to teach the myth of any peoples; be they Buddhas, Hindus, Abrahamic or any other sect.
Posted by: TheMoralAtheistI don't think they should teach evolution.
Evolution is simply an opinion. Most people believe that humans came from god, along with everything else. If we aren't allowed to be racist and have to respect everybody's religions in school, than why would be bring up the subject of evolution? Plus what your teacher is teaching you should be fact, and something that most believe or trust is right. I'm sure most students do not believe that we evolved from monkeys. I do not think it should be taught, plus it does go against most religions, and can be offensive.
Posted by: AnonymousIts called separation of church and state, people.
Its not like your kids arent going to learn about creationism in sunday school. Teaching it in school is forcing your beliefs on others, and it can be extremely offensive to people who are not christian. All kinds of wars have been started over things like this throughout history, and no good will come of it if we start now.
Posted by: AnonymousNo. There is no scientific evidence to back creationism up.
The large amount of supporting scientific evidence for evolution warrants it being taught in a science classroom. There is not enough scientific backing for creationism. Creationism can be taught in a social studies class where the other creation myths are taught. This would probably have a negative affect on creationism for those who still consider it a valid idea.
Posted by: AnonymousFor Those Who Don't Understand What a Theory Is...
A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. If enough evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, it moves to the next step—known as a theory—in the scientific method and becomes accepted as a valid explanation of a phenomenon.
When used in non-scientific context, the word “theory” implies that something is unproven or speculative. As used in science, however, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena.
Any scientific theory must be based on a careful and rational examination of the facts. In the scientific method, there is a clear distinction between facts, which can be observed and/or measured, and theories, which are scientists’ explanations and interpretations of the facts. Scientists can have various interpretations of the outcomes of experiments and observations, but the facts, which are the cornerstone of the scientific method, do not change.
A Theory is the most distinguished nomenclature that a scientific idea can reach. Things fall to the earth...gravity is a theory. Space and time are not absolutes and gravity is not simply a force applied to an object or mass...Einsteins Theory of Relativity. All life on earth has a common ancestor...Theory of Evolution and Natural Selection.
Please, now argue how the theory of gravity is just a theory, and we should give equal time to the fact that God is actually pulling objects down with his invisible hand. Sound silly? Well, your asking for the same thing.Posted by: jdateSchool is meant to overcome ignorance, not to teach it.
Creationism should not be taught in science classes not only because science is the opposite of religion, Just as Social Studies should not be taught in Gym Class. Aside from that, I don't think that students would enjoy learning Creationism in science class, at least when I was going through Elementary School the science Labs and experiments we did were my favourite part, but if we taught Creationism there would be no chance to to a lab or experiment, in fact nothing could be demonstrated all we could do is read from a book and use our "Faith" to support it rather than our mind to question it, experience it for ourselves and perceive it to be true.
Posted by: StrifeAbsolutely not, school is for facts
Creationism isn't proven and it isn't science. Teach children actual science and let them go home and get brain-washed by their parents with creationism and religion. Keep science at school and make believe at church where it belongs. Teaching children creationism at school as if it's absolute truth will give them much less religious freedom.
Posted by: emilyekeIt should only be given as a choice for either of the classes.
Most people may prefer to go a certain way in their life wishing not to be forced to learn something they do not believe in. It'd be best to let that area split into a two-way choice. No one has to be forced into something they don't believe. Let everyone go the way they want.
Posted by: HeavyReaderWhich other side do you choose?
Should we follow the Taoists who believe in an expansion from singularity to duality to trinity? Do we teach the Australian aboriginal dreamtime myth in which all the creatures and places where created by mystical animals and spirits from the stars? How about the Raelian concept that we were genetically engineered by aliens from another star system? Or the American Indian spirit myths? Or how about the Scientologists who believe we are the spirits that were trapped by an alien race after a nuclear bomb was set off inside a volcano?
Surely our children deserve to hear about all of these ideas and then choose for themselves! Or, we go with just the facts we have at hand that clearly show that man evolved from lesser creatures and leave spiritualism in the churches where it belongs.Posted by: AnonymousShut up you bible sucking people!
How dare you insult Mr.Darwin? The school should teach only the facts!I mean come on! Is religion really useful? Yet,evolution theory is very useful in life. Many people had various interest in it.That"s why 72% of the people voted yes!Any religion with gods or worshipers are just fantasy phony baloney boring cheap traditions.If a god exists, why does he cause crimes and other disasters?
Posted by: AnonymousNO
Creationism is NOT a theory, it's a story from some book that's filled with other fairy tales, fantasy stories, and full of contradictions. Evolution is a scientific theory which has been proven through many experiments and research to be true, that's why its a THEORY, not a hypothesis. Science is what we know, religion is what ignorants use to explain what we don't know
Posted by: GilgaustusYou can't teach and then contradict your teachings.
Make up your mind people. Evolution is already PARTIALLY taught in school, from my experience. Either teach your kids the truth, or force them to believe in some chauvinistic fairy tale. Evolution is SCIENCE, religion isn't.
Posted by: AnonymousThere is no evidence for creationism.
There are people who claim the we are here due to either Evolution or Creationism, so that it's a 50-50 equal chance that one is right. Creationism is not equal to Evolution. Evolution is based on evidence, while creationism is based on faith. Schools should not teach anything that is based on faith. Faith is just an excuse to believe something without evidence.
Posted by: qopelNo place in schools, no evidence.
There is no evidence for creationism. Creationism isn't even a theory. The science classroom is a place for actual science and evidence, not for pseudoscience and tales. If parents want their kids to learn about creationism, then they should teach them at home or take them to a church. It has no place in the schools.
Posted by: AnonymousProof
If you can supply valid proof, then yes. Otherwise you will have to present every religion's story. There's a separation of church and state in the united states for a reason.
Posted by: coolmeia911Creationism is not science
Creationism is religion, religion is not science. There is absolutely zero evidence of any sort of "intelligent design". We know that we have evolved over millions of years, and we know this from fossil evidence. Evolution is a theory which does not mean merely speculation, but rather an abundance of facts and consistent results. Creationism on the other hand is not based on any fact whatsoever. In other words creationism is not a theory, it's a guess. There is no debate between evolution and creationism, those whom are proponents of creationism merely have not had exposure to the scientific evidence for evolution.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is NOT science!
Evolution has been proven, creationism has zero percent worth of evidence to prove it. So keep your Dam religion out of public schools!
Posted by: DeathbeforedishonourI'm honestly ashamed to be American, looking at the "Yes" responses.
I cannot believe what you people are saying here. Perhaps I'll just go down the "Yes" column and just address some of your misguided views (and, as any peer-reviewed scientific journal or honest assessment of other country's political and social climates will confirm that they are, indeed, misguided).
Other countries (countries like the UK or Germany) do make fun of us because of our religion. Watch when notable British scientists or authors come on television shows like "Real Time With Bill Maher". We were founded as a secular nation, and here, we're the most ludicrously religious country outside of the Middle East. I mean, yeah, other countries are religious, too. Britain is mostly Protestant, yeah, but people in Britain don't question scientific fact like evolution. Other countries don't deny objective reality to satisfy their religion. That's why they laugh at us. We're delusional.
Creationism has no more to do with our history than Little Red Riding Hood. We're closed-minded, but we're closed-minded in the opposite sense than you seem to think. We're 80% Christian, and the ignorance is astounding. Ten percent of the country is Atheist, and because we insist that religion not be endorsed by the government or any of its institutions, you claim that America is being closed-minded. You're fucking ridiculous, you know that?
Evolution is considered "belief" just like creationism? I mean, you cannot be this fucking stupid. Read a goddamn book. I feel insulted just having to explain this to you: yes, evolution is a theory. Evolution is a SCIENTIFIC THEORY. Do you know what else is a SCIENTIFIC THEORY? THAT THE EARTH IS ROUND AND ORBITS THE SUN. EVOLUTION IS A FACT, FACTS IN SCIENCE BEING DENOTED BY THE TERM "THEORY." As for the bullying... To be completely fair, there are terribly strong negative correlations between level of education and religiousness; that is, the more educated you are, the less likely you are to be religious. They have a point.
People are offended by the teaching of creationism in public schools because that's government mandated religion. The first amendment guarantees me, as a student in a public school, freedom from religious influence and indoctrination.Posted by: VermilionGo with the evidence.
Creationism, while it has many believers, is not proven one bit, and very hard to believe. I mean think about it...One person created everything there is!! Not likely. In science proof is everything. There is vast amounts of proof for evolution everywhere. In museums, universities, libraries, everywhere. Where is the religious proof? In the bible. That is the only proof religious people have. The bible has been proven so wrong in so many aspects, how can anyone even slightly believe it? I mean the earth is only about 6000 years old?!! Are you kidding me! That alone should make people question. One God created one man and one woman and said go forth and create? Assuming they weren't related, still after a generation or two no more kids would be born as they all would be related! We have all seen the effects of inbreeding in science. It ends genealogical lines pretty darn quick! All the great minds in the world throughout history have studied this topic, and they all seemed to have come back with the same answer. There is no scientific possibility of creationism. Occam's Razor states (simple version) "all things being equal, the simplest explanation is the right one". No did one God create everything in 7 days, did moses put millions of species on one boat for 40 days, did jesus walk on water and create bread for thousands from one loaf, did water turn to wine, etc, etc. OR, did evolution occur over billions of years! I'm going with the last one!! Until there is indisputable proof of God, Jesus, Moses and any other bible reference, I will go with all the proof of evolution.
Posted by: SaschaQuestion: Who here has seen a million dollars in person?
That's right 99% of you have not! But yet we all know it existents. I read through a lot of these comments and I wanted to say, you guys are extremely rude with what you are saying. If you are against creationism I understand that, you don't however have to "yell" and "scream" about only saying your right and not having any evidence to back it up. Just because you can't see something, does not make it not real. How many of you have seen a person evolve from a single cell organism? No one? Huh... isn't that what you guys are basing evolution off of? Yet no one has seen this happen.... interesting.... also can someone explain to me that if we all came from a single celled organism how we are so perfect? Did you know that if the heart was moved over just a centimeter, we wouldn't be able to live? There are so many riddles like that having to do with the human body as well as the geographic of the Earth. Also their are geographic evidence supporting that the world is NOT billions of years old, but yet thousands of years old. See what I just did there, i supported my opinion with facts instead of "yelling" I am right and you are wrong so shut up. Whenever any scientist answers these quesitons with evidence and not a THEORY I will gladly take them into consideration. So next you decide to write on a website like this... try not to sound like such an idiot and research your information first. Please and Thank you!
Posted by: AnonymousWho made them then?
All of you people who are saying that creationism is false, unless you are a Hindu, you are false. Yes, humans evolved from other organisms, but where the heck did THEY come from? Some facts from creationism might not be true, such as Adam and Eve. But living creatures did not just appear on the earth and evolve. Something had to have made it. I am not saying creationism should be taught, but neither should evolution because both of them have a lot of false facts.
Posted by: AnonymousGive proof of creationism
There is evidence of evolution. There is absolutely no evidence of creationism. It is only a theory which is likely incorrect and, so far, has not been proven or confirmed. Plus, religions that don't believe in that theory could potentially be offended. Therefore, it shouldn't be taught in public schools.
Posted by: AnonymousThere is a good reason for separation of church and state. Too many different beliefs. Please allow our children to learn about the world in a safe place away from so many demogoges
dem·a·gogue also dem·a·gog (dm-gôg, -gg)
n.
1. A leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the populace.
Allow our children a place feel secure in a secular world.
Furthermore -
The appropriation of funds of the United States for the use and support of religious societies, [is] contrary to the article of the Constitution which declares that 'Congress shall make no law respecting a religious establishment'. James Madison, 1811, Writings, 8:133Posted by: lbaker6394Creationism is not science.
If you want to talk about "creation" in the context of the Bible then it should be in a religion class, and probably not at a public school unless it's a Comparative Religion class. It has no place in a science classroom or textbook. Evolution is a scientific theory, like gravity, that has ample observable physical evidence to support it. It can be tested again and again to provide the same result. Evolution does not require "magical" or "supernatural" events to have occurred. We don't need "faith" for it to be happening. There is plenty of evidence showing the constant evolution and changes in species over long time periods. We can also observe changes in smaller organisms with very short lifespans, like bacteria, that change and evolve into drug-resistant strains in shorter than a human lifetime.
Teaching the Christian creation myth in public schools is also a violation of students right to worship the religion of their choice. Not every student in the US is Christian. Why should they be subjected to a Christian religion based concept in a science class? The creationism people need to realize that they do not have a monopoly on faith and that they can't force their beliefs on everyone. Again, if you want to teach the creation MYTH in a public school, address it in a comparative religions or philosophy class.Posted by: AnonymousCreationism/Intelligent Design are not science.
This is simple all there is to it. Regardless of what you believe, creationism and its recent rebranding as intelligent design do not fit the definition of science. They are in no way testable hypotheses and fall back on the "god of the gaps" argument. Science works by figuring out the facts and then drawing conclusions based on them, whereas ID is a predetermined conclusion that its supporters are shuffling to find evidence to support, which is a mockery of the scientific method.
Posted by: AnonymousPublic Schools should not Teach Kids about Creation.
Schools are put in place to help kids through life in the job world mainly, not saying religion won't help you, it just seems like their is a time and place for religion and a public school is not the right environment. There are options out there for people such as a catholic or other religious group that have schools. Plus you'd then have to teach multiple creation beliefs because different religions believe in different rulers/creations.
Posted by: AnonymousNo religion in schools.
Plain and simple. No religions being taught in schools. How hard is that to understand?
Posted by: BiophoenixNo, Public Schools should not teach creationism alongside evolution
Then the schools would have to be called churches. Enough already with all this hypocritical New Right Christianity- Stay out of our schools!! God wants public schools to teach education and facts or he wouldn't have invented public schools. God wants church to teach whatever it wants, just so long as it doesn't interfere with what the next church teaches. It is getting downright frustrating to deal with people who think we should all think like them. I feel like there is some disconnect in the Teapubs brains/Hypocritical Christian Brains. You are infringing on our pursuit of happiness, our freedom of religion, and the entire constitution except, the right to bear arms. And you twist that to suit your own agenda too. If you want to believe in all things Teapub, fine, but quit shoving it down everyone elses throat. So..Stay out of our schools, stay out of our lives, don't tell us who to marry, don't tell us we can't have abortions, don't tell us why we have to be just like you. We don't want to be like you. We don't want our children to be like you. Just live in your own little world, and do as you want, and be what you want-----without interfering with the rest of our worlds.
Posted by: rruthbjEven i'm christian.
Controversial arguments or warfare of verification of which one is TRUTH is inevitably unable to be solved.
Only one thing we can't deny is the most plausible theory containing obtainable evidences is not creationism but evolution theory.
We all know the very opposite position creationism is located compared to evolution-ism.Posted by: thignerCreationalism is not a scientific theory.
regardless of evolution, creationalism is not a scientific theory, it doesn't follow the scientific method and therefore should never be taught in science classes. the only time it should even be considered to be taught is in religious studies as information to help children understand the views held by those that do support creationalism.
Posted by: TonnosiCreationism is religion in disguise
Religious sources should not be regarded as credible sources. They have simply not been proven using the scientific method. There is literally no proof that the Bible is true. Also, we should not introduce and force religion upon students. In America, we have the right to religion. Public schools, that are government run, have no right to teach Creationism and other religionss masquerading as proper science.
Posted by: AnonymousReligious traditions should not be confused with, or taught alongside, science.
I have no problem with teaching about religions of all types in a school setting, but not mingled with science classes. They are two completely different fields, and mixing religious agenda into actual science will only result in bad, ineffectual science.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is religion
America is not a Christian nation, contrary to popular belief. Some of the founding fathers may have been Christians, but they were first and foremost secularists. If we teach the Christian creation story, should we not also teach the Hindu one or the Buddhist one?
Posted by: AnonymousNot alongside, but nevertheless taught still.
While evolution has solid scientific foundations, it does not dispel the educational aspect of creationism from an anthropological view. People across the world for thousands of years believed that various gods sculpted and ruled the universe. There exists no scientific backing to evidence for this, so no, it should not be taught alongside evolution as a science. However, it is important to understanding how humans as a species and as a society developed, and why mankind should have believed in gods, and where in our history this developed and changed. It should be taught, along with other world religions, in a cultural sense. So yes, it should be taught in this fashion, but not as a scientific principle.
Posted by: AnonymousScience in schools, not religion
Creationism is NOT a scientific theory. It is scary to see the ignorance that is being spewed on the left column. If you're so convinced that there is no evidence for evolution and that it is ridiculous, feel free to not pay attention in biology and continue to straw man the theory to hell. Don't expect your beliefs to be taken seriously though when you have not even attempted to look into the "opposing side."
Posted by: lit.wakefieldNo
Creationism is not science, so it should not be taught in science class. History, Social and Humanities are places to put it instead. "will you believe you are a monkey" or "cats do not give birth to dogs" are not valid arguments as it is not what evolution is about. Creation is not witnessed, not confirmed by science (eg radiation dating) and the only reason some people believe it is because "the genesis say so". spontaneous generation is about if flies appear in dead meat.(disproven) Abiogenesis is how life first appeared on life (not disproven) In conclusion, proof of creation: Genesis
proof of evolution: rad dating, fossils of early humans (between us and apes, modern humans have bigger brains and no fur), homo sapiens living near the equator have darker skin to adapt to the hot sun, etc.Posted by: jh1234lReligion is not science
Religious study has no place in the science classroom. There is no scientific proof for creationism and the study of it belongs in the philosophy or anthropology class.
Posted by: AnonymousGod said let there be light
In the 19 century Clerk Maxwell found out that light is an electromagnetic wave caused by electronic transition of orbital occupancy. A change in orbital occupancy accelerates an electron releasing perpendicular oscillating electric and magnetic waves that manifest themselves as a massless particle called a photon. But I dont get it I thought God made light. It makes no sense. Its almost as if the universe has a desecrate set of rules and things dont occur by magic, but in sequence of steps governed by fixed laws. Nooo that's impossible, God obviously made light, just like people.
Posted by: MLK2Creationism is not science, and should not be thought as such.
Creationism has no scientific background. Absolutely no facts. Everything about creationism comes from a book. If we are going to teach creationism in school, we might as well teach Harry potter in science class also. Her is creationism in 1 sentence, a cosmic Jewish zombie will allow people to live with him forever in his magical sky castle, but only if we telepathically tell him he is our master, and we do this all because a rib woman at a fruit from a magic tree because a talking snake told her to do so.
Posted by: AnonymousScience should be taught in science classes.
Science is a process for testing hypotheses and building predictive models to increase our knowledge of how the world works. Science class in school teaches the results of those experiments and prepares students to continue pushing the boundaries of science further. Creationism, much like Vitalism and Phlogiston, is only explanatory and lacks the predictive ability required by scientific models to test for accuracy.
Posted by: markustlaumannBefore we continue, if we continue.
If you've got a truly open mind, and you critically think as you say you do--the definition of which being the ability to look at evidence thoroughly before forming conclusions and an open willingness to change your own perspective or conclusions based on the evidence (including any opinion shaped by religiosity)--then I have a challenge for you, should you accept. Go to google, and type in the search bar: "michael shermer creationism vs. evolution in why people believe weird things". Then, click on the "Why people believe weird things - flightsimHQ" link. It is a PDF file. On a side note, the whole book is fantastic, but for the purposes of this debate, scroll down to page 148 in the PDF document (125 in the actual book). Read the whole of Part 3 critically, remembering the definition I gave for critical thinking just a few lines above. That should answer your questions and help with any misconceptions of this position, especially in the section where Shermer addresses 25 common creationist arguments directly.
Posted by: ifonlyiwasfunnyNo, it isn't science. It is religion.
Firstly, religion is not science, so shouldn't be taught in science. Next, for all of you who are saying that it is just a theory, you should know that a "theory?" and a "scientific theory?" are completely different. A theory is "an unproved assumption while a scientific theory is "in science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists theory and fact do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theories commonly used to describe and explain this behavior are newton's theory of universal gravitation (see also gravitation), and general relativity." Challenging evolution would be like challenging gravity or the shape of the earth. I think the only reason you don't believe in evolution is that you are too blinded by your beliefs to see the truth. At least 90% of scientists (who are probably smarter than you) agree that evolution is the most probable way that life reached its current state.
Posted by: AnonymousI can see why.
I'm on the fence about this one because I'm a Christan but you can't say evolution is fake. While I see how creationism could be taught, I think a compromise could be reached where a student who belieives in creationism should not be forced to learn evolution and visa versa, an Atheist student should not have to learn about creationism. I think that the best way to solve this debate is take it out of the school ciricluam and have the parents/guardians teach the kids. Or let the kids choose, you know like if you want to learn about creationism go to this room, if you want to learn about evolution go to this room.
Posted by: that_guy_bradSchools are for education
not indoctrination.
Posted by: prajnadhyanacreationism is not science
by definition creationism is not science, if you did teach it in science class you would be in fact LYING to the kids which is itself prohibited in the bible. furthermore it would be wrong to teach anything from the bible in a public school unless you also taught other religions alongside the bible.
Posted by: AnonymousNo
Creationism is, at its very foundation, an argument from ignorance. It is untestable and presents NO evidinciary support.
Creationism focuses on two points....
a) Attacking gaps in evolutionary theory. This indicates a lack of understanding about scientific process in that a hole in a thoery doesn't matter if there is no contradictory evidence to go in its place
b) The idea that things seem too complex not to be designed: A completly subjective position with no place in sciencePosted by: whiteowl1415Creationism should not be taught along side evolution because it is not science.
Creationism should not be taught along side evolution because it is not science. People aren't automatically wrong for believing in it, but it is not science. Evolution might be just a theory, but it's a theory with a lot of evidence and science to back it up. Creationism is religion-based and religious education has no place in public schools
Posted by: H0bi3InvaderLet's Teach Old science too!
If we can in fact present "all sides" then we must account for the science stressed by the Catholic Church around it's formation: that the world is flat and that the sun revolves around it. Or Aristotle's "science" composed of four elements: earth, wind, fire, and earth. Religious freedom is great, as long as it's outside government and the classroom. Creationism is rejected by an overwhelming majority of the scientific community because it is absolutely ridiculous. It is merely religious people trying to "squeeze" the data to fit their views. We scientists don't come voice our opinions on evolution in your church so keep your beliefs out of my classroom!
Posted by: AnonymousWhat about Muslims and Hindus and all the other religions?
Shouldn't the Muslim faiths ( number 1 religion in the world) creationist views be taught too or maybe the Hindus views? We have freedom of religion which means in a government run school if you teach one you have to teach the others. We have muslins Hindus and many other religions in this country and just as much as you think yours is right so do they. Why should a Muslim be restricted to hear only your viewpoint when they know in their heart just as much as you do that they are right. If you want your school to teach your religion let it be a voluntary class and I would like the other religions taught too. Freedom of religion means I can practice my religion without being persicuted by the government. In a government run and government required school I should not be forced to listen to your religious views just as you should not be forced to listen to my religious views. Open your own school if you want to do that.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is not science
If students are in a theology class of some kind, then sure, by all means teach them about creationism (just don't preach it to them - let them come to their own conclusions). Creationism, however, is not scientifically based, and therefore should not be taught in science classes in school.
Posted by: A-Likely-StorySeparation between church and state.
Keep your religions our of our classrooms. You have a place to teach fairy tales its called church. Schools are for teaching FACTS that are PROVEN regardless if you believe it or not.
Posted by: eboskie1I oppose teaching creationism in public schools because state and church should be separate.
I oppose teachers teaching creationism in public schools alongside evolution because creationism is a religious notion, and religion does not belong in our school system. Schools should teach facts and scientific theories, not religious theories. In addition, teaching only creationism alongside with evolution is a poor idea because it only encompasses Christian beliefs, and ignores all other religious ideas on the creation of man and the world.
Posted by: AlaBabeCreation science isn't science.
I can understand learning about different religions such as I did in my 11th grade world history class, but taking the bible as fact and saying it's a science based theory? That's absurd! Evolution isn't a world view, evolution is being progressed everyday by proven facts. It has REAL scientific evidence to support this theory. The bible is not evidence, it's a claim. The Bible is a contradicting claim to be accurate, it's a clutter of different stories and they all have different meanings, therefore you can't prove any of it when it's contradicted over 7 times. There is NO evidence to support that the Earth was spoken into existence in the matter of 6 days. There is NO evidence that a flood occurred, the dates suggest that the Earth was under water while the Egyptian pyramids were built. It can't be taught as science when the claim they get their "information" from is a metaphor. Creation is religion, not science.
Posted by: AnonymousAbsolutely not!
Religion is something that needs to be kept OUT of schools. Just because Christianity is the largest religion in America, does not mean it is the only religion in America. It isn't a matter of "children hearing both sides," because there are a thousand different sides. But evolution is science, not religion! The theory grows and changes along with the evidence that we find, and we are getting closer to the truth every day. Creationism was a 'theory' that came about when people still believed that the earth was flat. It's like comparing apples and oranges; science and religion are separate topics and should be treated as such in educational facilities! Freedom of religion means that religion of ALL FORMS needs to be kept out of schools.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism should not even be allowed.
Then we would only be fair to learn every form of creationism. Which will get us nowhere. Plus, to learn creationism is to accept other aspects of religious science in both biology, medicine and other fields. Valid science is the only way to go. If the student doesn't like it, then let the said student fail.
Posted by: Kenneth_StokesAllow me to play devil's advocate
Now, while I think that creationism shouldn't be taught in the science classroom, there should be an option for the students to take a class that teaches the fundamentals of creationism. Creationism should not be a forced curriculum for the students also if you make creationism a forced curriculum it will cause religious tension in the classroom. In order to avoid religious tension teachers would have to know every religion's form of creationism, which would put more stress on your teachers and also you'd have to have a standardized test, and that would cost tax payers more money.
Posted by: RedZeadFirst amendment says it all
Creationists will argue that creationism should be taught alongside evolution. Creationism however is associated with almost all religions, including the main religions of Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution is clear to state that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof (First Amendment).” Public schools are a government constitution because they are government funded. Therefore, it is inherently unconstitutional to teach it.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is not science!
Creationism is a religious tale, it is not science and hence should not be thought in science class, but in bible class.
Posted by: WtfCreationism is patently false
Anyone saying "just a theory" immediately flags himself/herself as scientifically ignorant, as they do not understand the term. How about that gravitational theory? Or what about that atomic theory? Oh, and have you gotten the flu shot? If so, then you've tacitly admitted your belief in evolution because the viruses evolve and can become very dangerous (swine flu anybody?) Also I direct you to the Wikipedia page dedicated entirely to simply listing national and international scientific organizations that explicitly reject ID & creationism. If we're talking about science, let's listen to the scientists? Oh, and there's a consensus, imagine that.
Posted by: AnonymousIf creationism is taught in science class...
then we had better start teaching the stork theory in biology class, as an "alternative theory" to sexual reproduction.
Posted by: manbugbeebeeCreationism and Evolution contradict each other.
It would confuse students and undermine objective thinking. Creationism is anchored in the belief of god. Evolution is the most proven scientific theory. It's been measured, observed, reviewed, etc. Creationism is not proven, it requires that students believe in the "theory" without actually using the scientific method to prove or disprove it.
Posted by: derpususCreationism doesn't have solid facts and many scientists do not consider it to be fact.
Creationism should be taught in church as it relates to the Bible. The majority of the scientific community believe that the earth evolved therefore to study science properly, a base needs to be established where students can reference one model which is the likely model of our existence. Creationism could be correct and I'm not disputing that, we just need to teach what most scientists believe is true.
Posted by: R3ubHockeyCreationism is religious, not scientific.
By all means, it's worth teaching about creationism in RS lessons. That puts it in the context of what it really is - a religious belief. Creationism is an idea from religious texts, not from scientific observations and theories, and so unless there is scientific evidence to support it, it has very little place in science classes. The idea of teaching creationism as science stems from it being an opposing theory to evolution, not from its own value as a scientific concept. Similarly, evolution is not taught in RS (except, occasionally, for the theistic view of evolution) because its basis is not in religion. Though it's important for children to hear both points of view, particularly since this is a debate they are likely to come up against a lot, it's also important for the ideas to be kept separate. Presenting creationism as science puts it out of context, which can be confusing and misleading, and perhaps make it appear more credible within a scientific point of view than it actually is.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is not a theory
A theory is falsifiable, substantiated by evidence and consistent with other theories. Creationism meets none of these criteria and is not science. Evolution does meet these criteria along with the theory of relativity, atomic theory, germ theory etc.
Posted by: jobaEducators should not teach children theories that have literally zero factual basis.
The fact that both are theories and both explain the same things does not give them equal footing. A child should not be taught by adults (whom they automatically believe and respect - a byproduct of natural selection I am sure) a "theory" that has no empirical evidence. I don't think I need to explain which of the two lacks empirical evidence.
It is the job of parents to brainwash their children with ideas that have no factual basis, not the schools funded by the government to teach children facts.Posted by: zachary.steegeNot in science class.
Is creationism viable? That's a debatable question. Should it be taught in biology with the same respect as evolution? No. People who believe in creationism ironically already know it, but they don't know the theory of evolution. I'm not saying that creationism shouldn't be taught (although as secular as possible), it shouldn't be in science class though. There's no problem with it being mentioned, but not taught on the curriculum.
Posted by: Carnage1215Creationism isn't science!
We know tons about how evolution works, and even if we didn't, "We don't know how it works" still doesn't mean "It happened with magic."
Posted by: tripperdayCreationism isnt Science
It isnt falsifiable, isnt referenced in any peer reviewed journal, has no supporting evidence, and is obviously a religious mythology. Why would that be taught in a science class?
Posted by: AnonymousNo.
Children go to school to learn sciences. Evolution is a science. There IS evidence of evolution. Humans were not put on this earth 10,000 years ago as is and if someone cannot accept that, please, take them back to their science classes. If you want your children to learn about creation, well, isn't that what church is for?
Posted by: AnonymousProsthelytizing is never appropriate in a secular setting
There is no disagreement in the scientific community on the facts about Evolution and Abiogenesis, the "controversy" is entirely fictional, brought about by bully pulpits and megachurch preachers as an avenue to tear down secular walls and trample the first amendment protections against state religion.
Posted by: AnonymousEvolution is fact
Evolution isn't an idea, it is not a belief, it is not a religion. There is no faith involved in it. It is well researched, well modeled theory accepted by nearly all scientists, and indeed, most people in the world. On the other hand, there has been no evidence that says creationism can explain the origin of life, apart from a 2000+ year old book, which has been changed and translated to dozens of different languages over that period of time.
Posted by: AnonymousShould you teach that the U.S is a monarchy in history class?
Just because some people believe in something doesn't make it right, especially when you've really got proof they are wrong... Lots of people thought that the earth was flat, that doesn't make it true and when it was proved that it was infact circular there's no point in teaching it wrong.
I don't get it, people take it too personally, it's just science... So you want your kids to be taught something that is not right so that you can keep your ego? Is your faith so weak that you need for creationism to be real so that you can still believe in god?Posted by: darmstadioCreationism is NOT Science.
It's like teaching other languages alongside English in an English class. If kids want to learn Spanish, or Russian, or Japanese, they are free to choose an appropriate class. Similarly, if they want to learn about fairy tales, they can take a religious class. Fiction has no place alongside fact.
Posted by: MCEntreriNO WAY ON EARTH
There is absolutely no proof of creationism, but there is proof for evolution. Besides, creationism is a religious doctrine, and should be kept in the house of worship, and not with the accepted scientific theory and law. We know that evolution happens, and we should teach our children facts, not speculation. (PS: evolution does not explain the origin of life, just how life progresses)
Posted by: UnStupendousManWe would have to teach so much
If we gave way to creationism, then we'd have to give time to give the Scientology theory of how man came to be, the Muslim theory (sorry, that's pretty much creationism), the Hindu Cosmology theory (we are a melting pot folks), the Japanese and Chinese theories (multiple gods and their various ways of becoming the Earth and it's people)... I could go on, but why? None of them are based on anything that people have touched, outside evolution.
Posted by: trapper3There is no science in creationism.
There are no scientifically valid, peer-reviewed, studies that support a theory of creation.
Posted by: AnonymousIt is not proven by science.
There is nothing in science to provide evidence for creationism. Feel free to include creationism in a philosophy, or religion class, but there is NO REASON at all that Christian values and beliefs should be given priority over any other religions beliefs by putting the Christian beliefs in the science class and leaving the rest in a philosophy class. And also, why would something that has only been disproved by science be taught in science class?
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is not science.
Should we teach that lightning is Zeus throwing bolts down from Mt Olympus? No because it's not science, just a thought someone once had thousands of years ago. I can't believe there are still people that view that sort of stuff as fact. If people want their children to have a religious "education", then they can go elsewhere. They shouldn't expect it from a PUBLIC school.
Posted by: AnonymousIt's not science
I don't even know why this is an argument for some people. It's a SCIENCE class. Creationism is not a scientific explanation. That's not saying it's right or wrong, it's just saying that it's NOT A SCIENCE. So it has no place in a SCIENCE CLASS. Just like how acting lessons have no place in, say, a history class.
Posted by: The_Chaos_HeartJust stop it. Please.
This shouldn't be an argument anymore. I don't care what your religion teaches. Mountains upon mountains of evidence say we don't have to give the crazies a voice in teaching children. Even if the children are theirs. At the end of the day, Creationism is wrong. Evolution is right. Theres your argument.
Posted by: Anonymouslol what
religion has no place in classroom unless its theology course.
Posted by: AnonymousNo public schools should not teach creationism.
"Don't preach in my school and I won't think in your church."
Posted by: AnonymousEvolution only.
Evolution is logical. If you want to be taught creationism, go to a religious school, don't force public school students to be taught this stuff. School is supposed to be teaching logical theories, and creationism has no logic to it. At least evolution is a theory backed with scientific facts and evidence. Even in religion classes in public schools, it should not be taught; it can be mentioned, but not taught, because religion classes should be about the morals, teachings, etc. of the religions, not focusing specifically on the idea of how the world was created. That's what private religious schools are for.
Posted by: emmakeynesNo
Indoctrinate your offspring on your own time. Fairy tails have no place in science.
Posted by: Reality_wins1st amendment of the united states constitution
Not only should we not teach it in public schools, but it is not legal to teach religion in public schools.
And don't call it a theory, it's a hypothesis at best, there are zero facts and zero intelligent people supporting it.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...." This is the first part of the first amendment to the united states constitution it says get your religion out of my government and I'll get my government out of your religion. These are public schools, they cannot teach religious things. If you want to stupify your kid, teach them that at home or at church, don't make my kids have to listen to someone of inferior intelligence say ignorant things in front of them.Posted by: markalexander774Creationism is not a valid scientific theory
Evolution is a scientific theory, backed up by hard collective evidence from an extensive range of sources including DNA strands and fossilised remains. If one were to disagree with this statement, or indeed go further and argue that these so named fossils were mere fabrications created by the sinful, one would be disregarding facts entirely and without reason. Additionally, if one were to state that evolution is just a theory, and has the same amount of validity as creationism, this would also be wrong. Creationism has no conclusive evidence supporting its theory, thus as consequence cannot be taught in any school alongside evolution in science classes.
However, in a religious education class, teaching the belief- the belief, not the posing of creationism as a factual recount- is another matter entirely. People should be knowledgeable of numerous religions in order to appreciate culture and help the individual develop their own opinions. In saying this, more than one viewpoint and aspect of the religion must be viewed when teaching, in order to allow pupils to conceive for themselves what they believe to be right.Posted by: lhdIt isn't science
Creationism is a mere hypothesis that leaves more questions than answers. There is little science involved in it and just doesn't belong in a science class. Trying to mask it as intelligent design does not detract from its original flaws and is akin to teaching astrology as a competing theory to how our personalities are developed.
Posted by: DestinySheepCreationism is in no way science
Creationism is strictly a theological position. It has no place in science classrooms. Intelligent Design has been ruled to be "not science" by the courts.
Posted by: brlenThere is proof of evolution!
There is ZERO proof of creationism, just an old book. There are transitional skeletons that show the change from apes to humans. There's all the proof in the world for evolution.
Posted by: ndf211Evolution and creation are political ideas that can be messed up in a public school or forgotten. Treating the ideas as point and counterpoint is nonintellectual insanity.
I'm an agnostic, don't read this wrong. I don't believe in evolution because of the science. Talking about everything that isn't evolution as non-science leaves no way to talk about Lamarck and the research that is ongoing where genes are turned on and off by the conditions exposed to progenitors. It's all over the news but is not "creation science". There is a real, scientific and research based cause for debate and real science which can be effectively stifled if religion is brought into the discussion. Science belongs in schools, religion too, but not as opposing ways of understanding the world where any person can pick one or the other. I went to public schools in Texas, I know how badly this screws up the understanding of religion and science both to frame them as opposites.
Posted by: groovyboxCreationism is not science
Creationism is completely religious in nature. If people would like to learn about creationism they have the possibility to go to church and to learn about it. Evolution has been proven with little to no doubt. Creationism on the other hand has no scientific merit and is most likely not true anyways.
Posted by: AnonymousThey should enforce neither.
I think both should be taught in a basic level but not in depth so kids can chose what is that they believe in. I dont think we should be teching the Darwin's Theory when teachers can't even pray in school. To the opposite, religious studies should be part of every school's curriculum. Not just Christian studies, I'mnot trying to take favor to anyone, not to brainwash kinds and make them believe in something specifically but to educate them and make them understan what all that means. And even if they dont like religon, you can't judge something that you dont know about, that makes you an ignorant. They should learn about religons and the bibble so they can KNOW why they agree with it or not.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is not science.
In order for something to be taught in science class it needs to have a huge amount of evidence to support it. Only once a theory has been supported by multiple peer reviewed studies, and is generally accepted by the scientific community does it have a place in schools. When 97% of scientists accept evolution, and all evidence points to it as being true, it has a place in science class. Creationism is contradicted by virtually all scientific evidence, and has no support from the scientific community. It therefore has no place in science class, or any other class for that matter.
Posted by: AnonymousScience vs Theology
Each has their place, and to press one into the other's sphere would bring about an intellectual negligence in both cases.
Posted by: AnonymousWhat about FSM?
FSM will also need to be taught in our classes if creationism is. We should also teach about the Nine Divines and the Daedric Princes.
Posted by: AnonymousAncient Greek Titans would feel left out...
Think about it, there are hundreds upon hundreds of myths explaining the creation of the earth and universe. Creationism is being put in an unjustified position of respect. Creationists themselves don't seem to realise that they are only a fraction in the world of creation myths, just because this is the latest and most popular one doesn't make it true.
Honestly, if creationism is being put up next to evolution, I'd be the first person to say that Greek mythology, Norse mythology, Egyptian mythology, etc should ALL be up there with it. We wouldn't want to create an outrage on mount Olympus, would we?
Where's the difference between creationism and Darwinism then? The evidence for Darwinism, the fact that there is evidence for your theory tends to help your case along.Posted by: StarmatskeWhich creation story? Hopi, Hindu...
There are far too many creation stories to pick just one. Why would one culture get to choose the story to be taught in all schools? Choosing the creation story of the dominant population is an example of bigotry and exclusion. It's silly to compare a method of interpreting data with the faith-based belief systems, like Catholicism. Science is about the scientific method. Its storyline evolve with evidence.
Posted by: HonestDiscussionCreationism is NOT science.
Science: knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method.
Scientific method: principles and procedures for the systematic pursuit of knowledge involving the recognition and formulation of a problem, the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.
Creationism isn't science.Posted by: Anonymouscreationism should stay in church
creationism should stay in churches because its backed by churches and their beliefs
evolution is in science class because its backed by scientistsPosted by: AnonymousCreation is not a science.
It is a story of beginning due to a religion. It is for this reason that I disagree with this. I feel like the populous should not be forced into studying another's religion. Because, while we have many people of the Catholic and Christian faith, we have many other religions prevalent in our society and we should respect and uphold their beliefs as if they were our own. Who would want to be forcefully assimilated?
Posted by: MissUndomielno
For the same reason evolution isn't taught in churches. It's not an appropriate subject to teach in schools.
Posted by: AnonymousThe thought of this is absolutely ridiculous
Science class is about teaching us about the real physical world, not about a fictional book. It's clearly an advancement of religion and we all know that is unconstitutional. Another reason being that kids shouldn't be raised up to think that they are going to go to some magical fairyland after they die. They should know that they will eventually go back into the carbon cycle and be used as plant fertilizer. The only thing that should be taught is science, nothing else.
Posted by: Dasbomba147Science is Truth
To take a note from Neil deGrasse Tyson, regardless of if you believe it or not, science is still true. It's nothing more than observations of nature. We don't allow crack pot theories to be taught in schools such as Xenu bringing millions of people to Earth. There is no observable evidence of God thus God is not science. School is reserved for the transmission of facts and subsequent cognitive osmosis of the learners of those facts.
Posted by: FrioramaNo, they shouldn't.
Creationism is not science. The idea of teaching it alongside evolution opens other doors as well: what form of creationism should we teach? If we are doing it to be fair to all opinions and view points, why not teach all forms of creationism? Why just Christianity? Why not teach ancient Grecian creation myths?
Posted by: adontimasuNo. There are too many different viewpoints to be able to teach them in Public school
Creatiomism should not be taught in public school mainly because it is unfair to those of us who are not Christian (like me) and there is no evidence to support the theory. Personally, if it was taught at my highschool, the teacher and I would not get along very well because it is against my beliefs and I would speak up about it. Creationism is better left to be taught to the Christian private schools or taught in Sunday school, or even during biblical studies. The U.S. is a nation of free religion, they shouldn't teach Christianity without teaching everything else and even then, it shouldn't be taught in science.
Also, there would be tension in the class because not all us will agree or know what the teacher is telling us. For those of us whos religion is already made fun of, the situation would become worse. My friends and I have discussed religion a lot so I realize their side in this, but if you take a moment and look at someone else's view, you can see the problems this would create.
Both sides of my family came to America for religious freedom... One from the war in Ireland, the other from the holocaust. This land stands for freedom. Freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of press, freedom of the right to petition government for a redress of grievances, and mainly freedom of religion. You cannot take that away and teach only two sides of an enormous story in a classroom, besides that would put a lot of tension on the teacher because they have to know all the sides and science teachers wouldn't be used to that. They are supposed to teach facts and show evidence, afterall. They are not Social Studies teachers.
Just because Christianity is the main religion in this nation (73%,) doesn't mean you can just teach biblical creationism in PUBLIC shools.
Public schools do not have only Christian students. I am only one out of a least 100 (out of 300 total students) who are not Christian at my school. Just keep that in mind.Posted by: AnonymousNo because in the first place we can not prove the existence of god while in evolution we have a lot of evidences that support it.
The problem with creationism is that it DISTORTS a lot of scientific facts just to prove that creationism did happen. Teaching creationism to students is equivalent to teaching erroneous data. Another problem encountered with creationism is that it always attacks the weaknesses of evolution but they never cite any strong evidence of creationism. If creationism is taught in schools as an alternative, I guess we should also teach holocaust denial, alchemy and astrology.
Posted by: AnonymousTeach facts; not myths.
Evolution can be proven, existence of some kind of God that created the Earth in seven days, with people and animals, and a talking snake that caused the fall of mankind can't be.
We don't need school teachers to regurgitate the words of myths and fairy tales in a place of education. All it will do is brainwash children into believing that, and that's no education for kids to have.
If parents really want their kids to learn about creationism that badly, they can take them to the church where it belongs.Posted by: AnonymousIt is not a science.
Creationism is not a science. It is a religious belief. If anyone would like their children to learn about creationism, they are welcome to send their children to a religions class, teach them at home, or send them to a Bible camp of some sort. I will not allow my children to be fed something with no factual basis.
Posted by: AnonymousFacts facts.
Hey, if we're going to teach debunked theories, why not do other explanations for how the Earth got here? Like the Hindu, Sikh, or Greek myths? Why not the Egyptian myth while we're at it? Lol, there are some things we can't let children chose for themselves b/c we're assuming that they'll act in a reasonable manner even though we know their (by their I mean our, because I am a "child") brains are not fully developed.
Posted by: Dr.StrangeloveWhat proof?....It was God.....Prove it........Don't have to....Why? Cause you can't prove a negative.
If a school chooses to teach a religious "Belief", then fine, but only as far as to say "This is a faith based concept". And then, they would also be required to teach all religious views on creation. In other words, to teach what Christianity believes is to proclaim the school as believing only Christianity. Where as to teach all types of religion is to be a theological course. Which even then would not be science. Where science classes are teaching that which is considered the most logical theories "At the Moment". In other words, science doesn't roost on one theory for ever. It uses data until a better model becomes available. What ever that may be. And then that new theory becomes the norm. Regardless of the theory, it always uses several repeatable evidence and procedure processes to reach a point of theory. These vary widely based on the theory but more importantly. No theory encapsulated in science EVER uses religion and its central beliefs as a theory.
This is the one thing that seems to be ignored.If any religion suggested that "it was god" that discovered E=MC2, there would be an up roar from many positions. In other words, the only questions that seem to even entertain religion with in science are the ones that are typically unanswerable at this time.Or as a way to clarify, it appears that religion in general, tends to only try to give answer where they know it is relatively safe to chance it.Posted by: humanshoresCreationism = nonsense
Creationist are confused when it comes to how the word theory is used in science. It's a hypothesis that is put through countless tests and put together by retrieving data. Creationist say they believe in an ID because of faith. Faith is believing in something with out hard evidence. Why would we teach our future students to believe something with out evidence? Creationist probably still think that everything rotates around the earth and that the earth is flat.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is for Church.
Kids should not be taught creationism in school at all let alone science classes. That's all opinion and our country is one of many religions, not all of which believe in creationism. If you want your kid to learn it teach it to them at home or take them to church, or even send them to a private school. But let them learn an idea based on legitimate facts not a book that was told over the course of 2000+ years where the church was inclined to exaggerate truth to convert people.
Posted by: AnonymousWhich Creation story?
There are as many creation stories as there are religions. Which one do we teach? Which one is supported by any evidence? None.
Posted by: AnonymousFact is a fact is a fact
The people saying yes have mostly likely never read anything about evolution froma truthful source. Creationism is a religious thing, evolution is a science thing. so if were going to teach something in a SCIENCE class shouldnt it be science. My country is sooooooooooooooo STUPID.
Posted by: AnonymousTeach Religious Downfalls
If Creationism is "god forbid" ever taught in school they need to take away the religious element. I'm not disputing there is a higher power, I don't think any atheist can say without absolute certainty that there is no higher power, but Christianity and the Bible have been proven time and time again to be scientifically impossible. People can try to put their own spin on the bible and come to their own conclusions as to what it means, but the fact is the bible supports; genocide, slavery, incest, child prostitution, sexism, racism and so forth. I understand that these principles were universal at one time, but we have evolved from these stone age ideals and it would be ethically wrong to teach our children that this is ok. No only that, but do we really want to dumb down our society even more and teach our children that talking snakes and babies being born to virgins are in fact true? Instead of creationism, I suggest they have a class to educate children on how religion is universally used to control the masses and how there have been more casualties in religions name than anything else in the history of the world.
Posted by: AnonymousSeparation of church and state
Creationism is a religious belief. Regardless of whether it is true or not, it is based upon religion. As an American, I believe that this country was founded upon the principle of separating church from state and therefore do not think that it is appropriate to teach it in classroom. Evolution on the other hand, is not a religious teaching and is therefore permitted to be taught in schools.
Posted by: BroeyJagCreationism is not science.
Even the most devout believer in creationism would not want it taught in a science class if he or she simply understood what science is.
There is no evidence or experiment to run that could disprove creationism in the eyes of a religious believer. There is no basis in reality. It is not scientific.
If you want your children to learn creationism, teach them about it yourself or have them go to a religious class to learn it.
Don't try to shove non-science into science class.Posted by: IBfromRedditEvolution is settled science.
If schools want to teach creationism as part of a study of world religions, fine. However, it is not appropriate in the slightest to teach it alongside evolution as part of a "science" education.
Posted by: gusturSchool is for learning to get you further in life.
If people want their children to learn about creationism then they can take them to church. School is meant to teach you about information to get you further in life and to help get you a job. I don't believe that teaching about creationism will help some one get a job unless in the case of a priest or something in that category. NOT. IN. SCHOOLS.
Posted by: AnonymousEvolution is science fact, Creationism is religion.
There is no good reason why creationism should be taught. It is a belief, nothing more. The Theory of Evolution has stood up to the challenge and earned a spot in the realm of scientific fact. Creationism is nothing more than a story passed down through the generations. We do not teach ancient Roman and Greek mythology as fact, so why should we treat this religion any differently?
Posted by: thecomingstormFacts Vs. Faith
This boils down to something with physical evidence vs something that was written about in a 4000 year old book. If you really do wholeheartedly believe that god revealed himself to a nomadic tribe in Judea thousands of years ago, and that human being originated from just one man and one women, AND that incest is wrong (How on Earth they reconcile that is beyond me), then that's your business. However, just because you REALLY REALLY believe does not mean you get to teach it in a science class. When a lick of evidence can be found in creationisms favor, and I don't mean a flaw in evolutionary theory I mean ACTUAL positive evidence in that clearly points to creationism, then you can teach it in a science class but until then your creation myth has no more scientific validity than the ancient Greek's or Hindu's or Egyptian's.
Posted by: mynameismatthewCreationism is patently false
If this were a religion class or even a philosophy class it would be a different matter. Of course spiritual ideas should be taught in order to create a cultured person. It is different however, to say that creationism is science. Science is all about logic and reactions. There is no logical way that a reactant (God) could produce a reaction (everything) on top of that we can carbon date bones and even the oldest "human" bones don't come within centuries of dinosaurs, it just didn't happen
Posted by: AnonymousSeriously? Arent we a little 'evolved' ti be reverting to religious explanations as fact?
I suppose using the same argument some religious nuts who literally believe in a magic flying giant old white guy in the clouds, I could convince the court system to force church's to teach Santa Claus as an alternate origin of the importance of Dec. 25th... Really though, the concept of a consious life after physical death is preposterous. There would be infinite and beyond 'souls' in whatever form that you are supposed to appear (do u appear in the clothes u died in at ur death age? So if you were good and mangled in a car wreck do u appear as a mangled zombie in heaven? This determiniation along with every other inconceivable aspect of this fairy tale are ludacris... Seriously, nobody can really believe in this, they are just scared not too. The phrpose of religion has been control over a population using forma of manipulation by citing irrefutable theories as word of god... Its a natural progression in any culture- yet no two independant cultures have the same beleifs- because the only consistency is the human need for an ultimatum of fate beyond the grave that forces people to do good and not give in to destructive animalistic urges... Well one day we must evolve past this and focus on naking this world better cuz its all we got. Dont proliferate the type of ignorance that has lead to such bigotry and hatred based on outdated texts. Religion also advocates slavery racism and sexism- so thats irrefutable too? Get a clue and grow up. You die. Thats it buddy. Deal with it. Be good cause its the right thing not cause you want more after death. - spoken by the irrefutable voice of god!!! So it must be true!
Posted by: AnonymousNo, but not because it does not conform with the definition of science
No. I see two reasons for this.
First, assuming that scientific evidence is true, it is not wise to utilize time that could be better spent to teach something that almost everyone knows is incorrect. Second, given the nature of the schools (President Obama wants better grade instead of useful knowledge), students would not be interest in learning stuff that they know is not going to be tested (can you image a question regarding Genesis on SAT?).Posted by: TheElderScrollLet's move forward, not backwards.
In the 17th century, when Galileo famously promoted the Copernican theory that the Earth was not the center of the universe, the Catholic Church sentenced him for heresy. Of course, he turned out to be right, just like all the other scientists who have dared to suggest that many of church teachings are, in fact, fiction. To be fair, the church did correct its mistake, 359 years later. The edict of inquisition against Galileo wasn't lifted until 1992. Time and time again, infallible scientific evidence has disproven traditional religious beliefs. Such is the case with evolution. In the more than 250 years since Charles Darwin published "The Origin of the Species," an utterly overwhelming amount of evidence has piled up in favor of his theory of evolution. It is true that it is still a theory, but it is one that has been tested over and over by generations of some of the world's brightest minds. Public schools have an obligation to promote genuine scientific theories. Creationism, frankly, is not a genuine theory. We have to pass down our best understanding of the natural world to future generations, in order that they may build on current theories and make new discoveries. We don't have time to wait for the antiquated ideas of the church to catch up. If the past is any indication of how long that will take, we have about 100 years to go. We simply can't afford to lose that time.
Posted by: AnonymousThe truth is a non-democratic process
If I look at the sky, and noticee that it's blue, it's blue. No matter how much you hate blue, wishing that it was red doesn't make it any less blue.
Posted by: loltom333Of course not!
There is ZERO reliable evidence supporting creationism. We should only teach things that maintain a strong backing in reliable evidence, confirmed by multiple sources. Even then, we should maintain that there is always more to learn, and that our understanding is always incomplete on some level.
Posted by: Detah-rametCreationism: It isn't science
Creationism relies on the believer already believing. If someone comes at the evidence, with no previouis idea of what might show, they will never ever come up with anything in the range of 6-10,000 years. It is absurd. Science relies on not coming at the evidence with presuppositions of what it should show, but that if the foundation of creationism.
Posted by: muzebreakCreationism is based upon circular logic
The creationist stance is based upon a circular logic. God exists because it says so in the Bible. The bible is written by God, God cannot be wrong, ergo the Bible cannot be wrong. This closed loop is based upon all precepts begin correct, if you introduce new evidence that challenges that orthodoxy the loop of logic falls apart. Science, by definition is about challenging such logics, examining new forms of evidence in light of preexisting theory, and making changes when the evidence points in a particular way. In short scientists change their minds when they are wrong. Creationists never will. This is why it can never be scientific in any credible way.
Posted by: AnonymousSchools teach facts, not faith based beliefs.
Science is an obvious subject that should be taught in schools, and there is no science to support creationism. Regardless of whether you believe evolution is a proven fact, no one can deny that it is not supported by science. If there are truly "holes" in evolution then I have no issue with those holes being analyzed. However, logic is another concept that should be taught in schools, and here is some simple logic: Holes in evolution =/= creationism.
Posted by: Double_RSchools shouldn't teach evolution in schools because it isn't a universal belief or even fact.
Schools have always argued whether or not to teach evolution or creation because there isn't a direct and clear right or wrong answer for which one would be best to teach. Some kids believe in it and some don't, that is just a part of our divers, cultural world. Forcing a child to learn something against their beliefs is just wrong and not worth the hassle or pain/anger that it could cause in a developing mind.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is not within the scope of a science course by the definition of science
By definition of what a science course encompasses, a science course should teach knowledge and methods accepted in the mosaic of scientific theory and methods currently accepted. It would otherwise not be teaching science.
In terms of practicality, or usefulness of the knowledge taught to the students, creationism does not occupy a position equal to that of evolution from the perspective of the scientific community, which is primarily what a science course is preparing a student for. In order to have a more objective and broad knowledge of the basics of the world or society, a student will probably benefit from understanding of creationism as a theory alternative to evolution accepted in many major religions, but not by scientific society. However, the way the question is stated suggests that creationism would be taught as an entirely equal, accepted alternative theory, which may well confuse the students and not be useful in this area of their academic pursuit.
Addressing in particular the public school aspect of the question, it should be noted that creationism (to my limited knowledge) is more relevant to specific religions such as Judaism and Christianity, so may not be sufficiently "universally relevant" for a public school, which is intended for students of all ethnic, religious, cultural groups etc that may attend.Posted by: goldfishBecuase of evidence
In school we learn things that have been proven by science, creatinism is not proven by science. It should be thought under the subjekt ''religion'' becuase it is a faith. You can argue that YOU think it's acurate and correct, but many religions say their view is correct so if it's not proven by science it should not be taught.
Posted by: SakarakiIt is anything but "fair."
Scientific theories such as evolution have to undergo a rigorous process of collecting and evaluating evidence, testing, repeating tests, and peer review. All of these hurdles must be passed before an idea has the honor of being labeled a theory and added to textbooks.
If we are to be truly "fair," then we must expect religious ideas to also pass these hurdles in order to earn their place in science and the classroom. Anything less would be extending an unfair privilege to religion.Posted by: PazuYour "some people say this" response is bad and you should feel bad.
Your stupid "some say this" was of presenting it is really stupid. You would then have to apply it to everything:
You would have to mention the grassy knoll shooter when talking about JFK
You would have to mention the possibility that we didn't land on the moon when talking about the moon landing
And you would have to mention that aliens might have landed at roswell
Except these three things are for more credible than creationism.
I mean seriously you people think that God created earth 6000 years ago and that Dinosaurs and man walked side by side, How stupid are you?
Stop trying to control our government so we can move on as a people.
The stupidity of you people is giving Americans a bad name. Other countries are laughing at us because of you idiots. Not to mention the disservice you are doing to your kids. I hope your kids grow up and never visit you when you get old so you can die alone and then not go to heaven because heaven doesn't exist.Posted by: marksf74No
Screw creationism, we might as well teach kids the stork theory of how people are born if we teach evolution
Posted by: imabenchIndocternation has no place in science
Science is testable, reliable and logical. Intelligent design has no scientific backing... at all. None.
Teach science in science class! Teach testable theories. Teach critical thinking. We lose ground as a nation every time we promote and support ignorance in the name of religious tolerance.Posted by: joe1990Facts anyone?
Maybe "creationist" should get some real facts before we consider it as something teachable.
Posted by: AnonymousScience classes are for science, creationism falls under religion/faith.
Perhaps if you were to establish creationism as well as everything else, as being part of the foundation that lead to the development of evolution, in the context that they're explanations of origin, then sure, go ahead. Otherwise, your making claims you can't prove. As for "teach the controversy", then you should teach the "childbirth vs. The story?" Controversy as well.
Posted by: AnonymousIs this even a question?
Creationism is not a scientific theory, it is a belief. A theory in science is a rational explanation for something that has evidence to support it, however, it is not definitive. Creationism is a theory, but not scientific one at all. There is not evidence for it what so ever. You can teach this to your children but let the school and science actually teach evolution, since there is plenty of evidence for it. Which is, you know, SCIENTIFIC.
Posted by: LeonTheBraveIt isn't science
Plain and simple it isn't science. I have no problem with the creation myth being taught in a religious studies course or perhaps a fantasy literature course. Teaching it in science is simply not science. Evolution has stood the test of time; the fossil record is clear. Teach creationism in the churches. Teach science in the science classes.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism has no place in the science classroom as it is a religious topic and is not supported by scientific evidence.
Creationism, also referred to as creation science and intelligent design, stems from a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis. However, even Pope John Paul II felt that evolution did not contradict church doctrine. Unlike evolution, creationism is neither explanatory nor predictive, both qualities of a sound scientific principle. Yes, evolution is ?only? a theory. So is gravity. Both evolution and gravity are described as theories because science has not yet been able to explain every aspect of either principle. However, I have yet to see gravity fail and leave me floating above the earth's surface. Evolution belongs in the science classroom and creation belongs in the religion classroom.
Posted by: 5hiy42acCreationism shouldn't be taught in science class
Creationism isn't science and not a generally accepted idea like evolution so it shouldn't be taught with it. Intelligent Design is an idea that is directly related to religion. Creationism is also against the first amendment. Evolution has been around for almost 200 years and has yet to be changed dramatically.
Posted by: AnonymousIt's a waste of time.
It has no practical application and doesn't hold any real evidence to it. They might back you up with their "bible evidence" but that wouldn't be considered any more than plausible than "harry potter evidence" or "lotr evidence". I would let my child read any of those books but I would be sure not let him worship Dumbledore or Gandalf.
Posted by: aciduniverseTeaching creationism alongside evolution would create a generation of scientifically illiterate Americans
Creationism and Evolution are two completely different things. One is religion, the other is science. Religion should be taught in religion classes, such as Sunday School. Science should be taught in science classes. As there is no credible scientific basis for creationism, teaching it in a science class would amount to teaching religion as science, which would be a grave disservice to our students.
Posted by: GLawrenceThey both really shouldn't be taught as fact or theory
When it comes down to it, both ideas end up being circular arguments, and really shouldn't be taught in the science classroom. Creationism is based off of a God creating everything with his BARE HANDS (or even less, just his voice) but it really doesn't explain where God came from, and really isn't logical. Evolution, on the other hand, is caused through random genetic mutations, assuming that the matter was already there, which then gradually formed the beings that are around today. This is really unlikely because many organisms wouldn't be able to exist unless certain things had a really large amount of spontaneous mutation to develop some creatures that would even be able to survive. Even then, looking at animals today, organisms become sterile when they have any mutation whatsoever. They really both shouldn't be taught in the science classroom but should both still be taught.
Posted by: AnonymousOnly if you're in America.
I live in the Philippines by the way. I studied in a Christian school from prep till I graduated high school. I was faithful (more or less, plus my great aunt's a nun) and at the same time interested in science. Teachers in Christian Living (Christian subject) and science are all awesome. But I don't think anyone here took the Bible literally, even the Christian teacher.
Posted by: AnonymousScience Classes are for SCIENCE
Science is a way of understanding the world around us based on observation and evidence. The creationism belief has neither in support of it. Evolution is a central concept in how we understand all of biology. Creationism has no place in a science classroom, or in any discussion of science at all.
Posted by: NichelleOsaurusNo.
Personally I think the evolution is the path because teachers can't prove Creation. If you want to learn of creation go to church. School is a place to learn facts. Most of the people believing in creation only support it due to their religion. Religion shouldn't be the deciding factor.
Posted by: AnonymousLack of evidence
The arguement for creationism is based on people assuming and guessing. There are no concrete evidence to support any of it, and it contradicts with evolution which has plenty of evidence.
Posted by: AnonymousWhich one?
You cannot only teach 1 religious view point in America if you plan on teaching it at all. You must teach ALL religious view points (i.e. Christian (can even go more in depth Catholic, Pentecostal, Anglican Etc.), Muslim, Buddhist, Islam, Hinduism, Shinto, Judaism, Wicca, and again Etc. You would have to devote an entire class period to cover all or even the majors evenly to be fair to all religions. Maybe have the class as an elective but DO NOT TAKE UP THE TIME OF SCIENCE!!!
Posted by: yrtonoroNot as a FACT!
To attempt to place a single religion's creation myth in a class that is meant to deal solely with scientific evidence is utterly wrong. Creationism has never been observed in any sort of demonstrable conditions, whereas evolution has been observed and well documented in numerous laboratories. It is obvious which should be covered in a science course.
Many uneducated folk attempt to misuse scientific terms, and claim that "evolution is JUST a theory". Unfortunately for these people, they don't understand the differences between a Law, a Theory and a Hypothesis. Perhaps if they took the time to do a little research (or stay awake in class) they'd understand how foolish they sound.
There is only ONE class where it could be deemed acceptable to teach Creationism, and that is in History...preferably while going over all the religious beliefs and myths of other cultures/people. That way, Christian doctrine can have the same time as Wicca, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Daoism, Zoroastria, Buddhism, etc.Posted by: BlackDove86Separation of Church and State
It is not a public school's job to teach religious material that has little to no scientific proof supporting it. It is against the 1st amendment.
Posted by: MJKkidNo
Let us ask: Is there any evidence for creationism aside from faith? Is creationism a hypothesis that has been tested, peer-reviewed, etc? Or is it purely a matter of faith? I believe it to be the latter. Contrast this with the vast amount of anthropological evidence for evolution, which is provided as a foil for creationism. If creationism is 'taught' at all in schools, it should be introduced in this manner: as a baseless matter of faith which some religions believe in; not as a matter of science.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is false
Science should stay in schools it would confuse children and possibly hurt people who dont believe in god. NOT ALL PEOPLE BELIEVE IN GOD there are many other religions and faiths so if we were to put one in school we would have to put them all in schools.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is religion in the guise of science.
Creationism is the belief that the universe was created by a Creator. It bypasses Biblical theology by stating "a creator", while not naming a specific name. If we shall teach "creationism" as a theory of a single Creator per Judeo-Christian beliefs, why not teach the Muslim belief that Jews are descended from monkey while Muslims are created by God? If science education must incorporate and accommodate religious theory, we should not stop at biology. Why not teach the steady state theory of the Buddhists to be taught in physics? After all, their belief is also based upon religious beliefs without specifically naming a creator. Why not teach the Creation myths of the Hindus in which reality is the dream of a single God? None of those beliefs are more or less valid, if we allow religion to be taught as science. While we must be careful to remember that "The Big Bang" is a theory, it is the one with the strongest evidence. And teaching "The Big Bang" does not preclude religious students from believing their Creator (or Creators) were the trigger of that event. But demanding a Creationism theory be taught diminishes the seriousness of the evolution, as well as opens the door for all religious beliefs to be interjected into all scientific discussions.
Posted by: Pir4AndA resounding NO.
This is nothing against the hypothesis of creation; however a science class is for objective material. Action and reaction, to the limits of our ability to understand them.
Creation beliefs are subjective to cultural influences. They have a firm place in philosophy and history classes, but would only serve to offend people one way or other if brought into science.Posted by: RagnarVery simply put:
Bible Study should be optional. I don't, personally, believe creationism OR evolution should be taught in any science class. Both are theories, and while the question will always remain as to which one has more proof (evolution), so neither should be instructed. Science is based off of fact, and while I personally believe evolution is basically fact, and theories are not completely fact, hence the term "theory." Therefore, it should not be taught in public schools.
Posted by: devery.delkFirst Amendment Right
To include a "religious" based "science" is a violation of the freedom of religion (and from religion) clause of the first amendment. I do agree that teachers should allow for students to question the evolution theory as this is a part of the scientific method and a basic learning technique.
Posted by: cuteusernameReligion does this anyway?
We already have religion classes in some schools, certainly at mine where it is compulsory, and this gives you the opportunity to learn creationism. Science is not creationism, so why teach it under science? And if you taught them both in science, their respective ideas would undermine each other and would be pointless.
Posted by: AnonymousAbsolutely not. At all.
This is a question of what is correct and incorrect.
You cannot debate facts. Only opinions.
And the school is a place for facts.
So if you honestly want to force your kid into a fantasy world where bearded men zap sheep and flowers and such into existence, homeschool them. And if you do, props to you for abusing the mind of a perfectly healthy child and filling it with garbage.Posted by: GaerteuthCreationism cannot and has not been proven. Evolution has.
Evolution has been proven. It is undeniable but to the foolish. Creationism is faith based and we do not live in a theocracy. Private schools have the ability to teach it if thhey want, but public schools should remain religion free, because not everyone believes the same things. Separation of Church and state.
Posted by: AnonymousNot even kind of.
Creationism isn't science. In now way does it follow the scientific method, it violates what we already know about life today, and it is unfounded. Does anyone around here want to teach creation myths that their religion doesn't give any credit to? Don't push your bogus religion down people's throats.
Posted by: bholly24The US is a secular nation.
The founding fathers wanted a secular nation; they wanted a "wall of separation between church and state". That is the intent of our first amendment. I believe that teaching creationism (an aspect of certain Christian beliefs) in the public school system is breaching that. Furthermore, the Students should be taught proven facts so that we can progress as a species. Creationism goes against biology, geology, geography, astronomy, physics, and the list goes on. If God is real and Christianity is true, it is not proven to be so. It is disturbing that so many religious individuals who don't REALLY understand evolution and science, would completely disregard it and turn to a simpler explanation for life. Then they add salt to the wound by dumbing down their children with this silly ideology. Religion should be practiced outside of school. It is a place of knowledge, not beliefs originating from a book written in a primitive age that supports the claim of a flat Earth.
Posted by: AnonymousWhat happened to separation of church and state?
If you want to teach your kids about the 'word of god' then take them to church, a building dedicated to keeping them in one mindset. If the point you want to make is to keep your children from hearing these 'words of the devil', then see if your school board can give your 'little angel who will burn in hell if he's not a saint' any special treatment.
Posted by: CanopyEvolution is supported by evidence. Creationism is not.
Creationism is not supported by Science, so there is no reason to teach it in a Science class. Not only is there no evidence whatsoever that supports Creationism, but it also goes against the evidence discovered in evolution. Evolution is a scientific theory, so it is based on an overwhelming amount of evidence. In fact, evolution is understood by Scientist far more than the theory of gravity is. Creationism is only based on the religious point of view and it uses pseudo-science tactics to back up its claims. They see evidence where there is none which makes them no different than those conspiracy theorist who think 9/11 or the moon landing was staged.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is not Science
I support teaching creationism in classes that teach religion and perhaps even philosophy, but in science classes. Creationism is not science. It is an explanation for the origin of everything based on anecdotes, assumptions, and speculations. There is no worthy evidence to give it credit in science. Complexity and order in nature is not a good argument. Crystals are complex and orderly, yet it is a known fact that these form naturally without any intelligence involved. Under the right conditions, they fall from the sky in the form of snowflakes.
Posted by: Nathan173ABNo, even though I am a creationist.
Would you want an atheist teaching a religion class or for that matter properly representing creationism? I would tend to answer no that is my primary reasoning behind not teaching such a subject in school. The responsibility of fairly representing Creationism should be left to the parents. Now evolutionism, you're not off the hook because although many claim evolutionism is science macro evolution the truly controversial portion of the theory that creationist dispute is in fact a philosophy and should be addressed as such when taught. Science is defined as something that acts within the scientific method and macroevolution is an unrepeatable situation that has yet to be test and therefore is not science but rather a philosophy. But as an operational assumption in science although a philosophy it should still be taught to show how scientist explain our daily lives.
Posted by: AnonymousMost science would become useless.
If school were to teach that the world was created by intelligent design then most sciences would become meaningless to teach. Also there are so many different religions that we would have to teach them all in order to not show one as superior to the others. We couldn't just teach Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, for they would seem to be promoted by schools as the superior religions.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism shouldn't be taught in public school.
Public schools should not teach Creationism because it would create even more arguments. It's better to just keep Creationism inside the Church and away from public schools. Plus, many people do not go to Church these days and it's their right to decide whether or not they want to be religious.
Posted by: Anonymousonly as religious history (what people used to believe)
creationism is insane and totally wrong, evolution is proven beyond doubt
religion has no proof at all
it is counter intuitive to every branch of science and critical thinking
creationism is just people trying to fit the world to the bible
because they are obsessed with the bible and will tell any lies to preserve their delusionPosted by: freethinker101The fact someone could say yes disgusts me.
The theory of evolution is a model filled with facts, observations, and tested hypothesis that explains a specific phenomena. Things such as common ancestry are proven by the nested hierarchy corroborated by both genetics and the fossil record. Creationism is an unfalsifiable hypothesis with absolutely not supporting evidence.
It would be a horrible thing to teach an unsupported religious view in a science class alongside one of the most or the most supported(with evidence) theory in science.Posted by: StevenDixonCreationism is opinion, evolution is fact.
If you want to hear about specific religious beliefs, then just head on down to church every Sunday where that is acceptable. If you want to learn something based on evidence that is currently developing and currently has more empirical proof than the alternative, then go to school. It'll make you a smarter person.
Posted by: AnonymousAll of the arguments for creationism are flawed and not evidence based.
School is for learning facts, not fiction. School isn't showing you different things that you might choose to be correct. It's for learning, not choosing what you want to believe. Evolution is a scientific theory backed with evidence, and creationism has no evidence whatsoever. You should have to prove things before teaching them to children.
Posted by: AnonymousNo, absolutely not.
The two should not stand side by side, as Creationism does not have any basis in fact. One must also take into account that separation of church and state applies to public schools, as they are funded by the government. Creationism is of course religious in nature, and thus has no place within the public school system.
Posted by: AnonymousScience is science while creationism is an "ism".
Anything loosely associated with religion should not be taught in standard public schools systems. Definitely not alongside science. Not at all. Science is an exact science. Our existence and tangibility can be measured and proven. Creationism is an important part of our history and should not be ignored; but too closely relates to religion which has no place in schools.
Posted by: AnonymousIt's a science classroom people....
Creationism is not science, so why should it be in the science classrooms? Creationism cannot be tested and can never be proven. Evolution is tested and has been proven and is a great theory. (A theory means that it is a collection of ideas that are perceived as correct not hypothesis, please get it right) Teaching creationism in science would be like teaching Math during English class. All you'll do is confuse kids what they are learning and set them up for failure. Creationism should be taught as it is important to history, but as for science, I am waiting for the proof.
Posted by: WillsturdRE 'yes, it is still a theory.'
Sorry, but in response to the point entitled 'yes, it is still a theory' I would just like to point out that it is not 'just as valid' as evolution. To quote the wonderful Bobby Henderson, who, in protest against the Kentucky education board enforcing the teaching of creationism in biology lessons, said that he believed the world was created by a giant, invisible pile of flying noodles and wrote them a letter saying
'I think we can all look forward to the time when these three theories are given equal time in our science classrooms across the country, and eventually the world; One third time for Intelligent Design, one third time for Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, and one third time for logical conjecture based on overwhelming observable evidence.'
So yes, technically it IS still a theory, but anyone considering it even close to 'perfectly valid' must accept that absolutely anyone can make up a theory as valid as creationism, and that no creationist can ever EVER argue that something such as Pastafarianism (gospel of the flying spaghetti monster) is 'ridiculous' or in any way unfounded, because the 'theory' of intelligent design has no more basis on fact than the toothfairy.
Posted by: KathyrnThe educational system is based on facts
The educational system serves to teach children facts from which they can then derive their personal opinions, or delve deeper into the subject if it interests them. Teaching creationism would mean submitting to a doctrine, and placing a personal, unsubstantiated belief on par with facts. We are very well aware of evolution and the evidence that it happened. If one wishes to believe the contrary in spite of the evidence, they can. But schools should not endorse such behavior.
Posted by: zgb1997Creationism is not science
Creationism is religion, religion is not science. There is absolutely zero evidence of any sort of "intelligent design". We know that we have evolved over millions of years, and we know this from fossil evidence. Evolution is a theory which does not mean merely speculation, but rather an abundance of facts and consistent results. Creationism on the other hand is not based on any fact whatsoever. In other words creationism is not a theory, it's a guess. There is no debate between evolution and creationism, those whom are proponents of creationism merely have not had exposure to the scientific evidence for evolution.
Posted by: joetaiAre You Kidding Me?
First of all, evolution itself is a fact. The theory of evolution is the attempt to explain why evolution happens. Creationists spout out all the time that "it's just a theory like creationism." No, it's not. Creationism is an unsupported hypothesis that shouldn't have any bearings in the educational system apart from mythology. Putting the hypothesis of creationism alongside evolution is a disgrace to the scientific method. There is a mountain of evidence to support evolution and none to support creationism. No, the bible is not evidence and it never will be on scientific issues. There is nothing supporting the idea that Yahweh, specifically, made a man from dirt and then made a woman by ripping out a rib from the man. Not only is it non-sensical, data refutes creationism because the Earth is most certainly more than 6000 years old. The real age of the Earth is about 13.77 billion years old. Creationism is off by a factor of 2 million. It's astonishing that this is even a debate. Youth Earth Creationists need to accept their hypothesis is unscientific. This is just one more attempt by the religious to taint real education. Science takes observations, formulates a reasonable hypothesis, and tests it. Science takes data and revolves answers around that data. Creationism, like all other variations of faith, takes an answer and desperately try to make evidence that isn't there fit their conclusion. Creationists that try to get their idea into science classes are intellectually dishonest, ignorant, or both. No, creationism shouldn't be taught in schools as a valid hypothesis because it's not. If anything, it should be left to mythology where all primitive hypotheses about the introduction of modern humans can be discussed. Not a science class; it isn't even science. It's a joke: the hypothesis, the idea it should be taught in schools, and worst of all, the fact that, in a supposedly an advanced nation, we're still debating this as if it were a legitimate issue.
Posted by: x2MuzioPlayerSecularism, secularism, secularism.
Creationism would be promoting specific religious beliefs, which cannot happen in public schools. If schools with specific religious ties (ex: private Catholic, Lutheran, or otherwise affiliated Christian institutions) wish to teach this, they have that right.
This last sentence has nothing to do with my argument and is fulfilling my word count.Posted by: CaliforniaEvolution should be taught, as the sum of facts we currently have.
Creationism has absolutely zero facts or evidence to support it. Evolution (as is any science) is an ever changing set of data, that is what we know about the universe around us thus far.
The theory of gravity is still "a theory", however, we observe it in every day life.. Saying evolution is just "a theory" is ignorance to scientific principles.Posted by: AnonymousEvolution is a key component to education, creationism is not
The teaching of evolution is a necessary component for every basis in science; every career in the science field would require at least an understanding on how evolution works. Especially in the medical field; bacteria evolves, and to develop new vaccines, evolution needs to be accepted and understood. Unlike evolution, creationism is not a necessity for education and outside of the learning environment, students can research and practice whichever faith they like.
Posted by: K789As defined as science by those who are qualified to study science
A priority of the debate should be the origin and classification of both sides. Evolution is a product of scientific inquiry. Creationism is an attempt to find evidence to support creation, whether or not it is true, and was formed outside of the scientific community by those who do not understand science.
Whether or not creation is true, it does not provide a useful model that can contribute in any way to any field of science. We might as well continue to use evolution in research. Creation is real? Good to know. What can we do with it? Nothing.
Considering all these things, as they are all attributes of robust science, and given the state of both sides, only one qualifies to be taught in a scientifically oriented classroom.Posted by: AnonymousOnly acceptable if all other religions are taught
Why should Creationism, a theory of life from a religion, be taught exclusively if all other religions are not taught? If creationism is taught alongside evolution, then schools should also teach aspects of Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, and such. Keeping the teaching in public schools secular, as guaranteed by separation of church and state, is the best option.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism Can be Disproven
Creationism says that god created man (among other creatures) about 10,000 years ago. This is completely false and can be proven so. Through a PROVEN scientific process called carbon 14 dating, we have found that some of the fossils of early man and other animals have existed far before 10,000 years ago. Creationists, if you want to argue carbon 14 dating than you can, but i doubt that you will get very far.
Posted by: AnonymousScience = evidence, Creationism = faith...Please consider what is appropriate for a science classroom in a PUBLIC SCHOOL (not a Christian church)
Reading through the points on the yes side alarm me. Please everyone understand that a science classroom is unique. Science is the way of knowing something based on evidence, based on observation from nature. The point is creationism is based on faith, not evidence, therefore it has no place inside the science classroom. Not to denounce it, or say that it is wrong to believe, however it is not appropriate for a science classroom because it is not science! Plain and simple. Intelligent design is also based on faith, it is as well non science. Science teachers should only be teaching science, therefore nothing based on faith but only ideas based on evidence.
And more importantly, creationism is Christian. To teach it in public schools would be prejudice to all other religions of the world. Let alone to teach it in a science classroom would be ignorant of what science is and what is stands for. Please, people on the left side, understand that you have the right to believe whatever you want, the first amendment is beautifully written, however to not force your beliefs onto people in public schools. And evolution is not a belief system, it is science=supported by evidence and observations from nature. Remember science does not answer everything, there are no facts, life is a perception to us all. However please understand that topics based on faith are not appropriate for a science classroom.Posted by: jjackCreationism doesn't belong in Science, let alone school.
Creationism is based upon faith, not science. There is absolutely no supporting evidence! And yes, Evolution is "just a theory". In other words, its backed by a good ton of evidence. Gravity is still just a theory. You people really need to learn what scientists mean when they say "theory". Being a teenager, I'm still in high school. If the government suddenly decided to make teachers teach creationism, I would get in so much trouble for bashing creationism, or not showing up for class. The problem is that evolution is a scientific theory, and it belongs in science. I can see how people get upset that science teachers don't say "Evolution MIGHT be true", but if you don't believe it to be a fact, you are very ignorant. Evolution belongs in science class because it IS science. Creationism has no evidence, besides faith. Which clearly isn't evidence. If you have a problem with your child being exposed to science, and want more religion to be taught to them, then why don't you enroll them in a catholic school? They have those y'know.
Posted by: minorityvsmajoritySeparation of church and state
Get over it, the founding fathers wanted a separation of church and state. Kids can learn about their religions in school if you want to pay for it. You don't? Then shut up and pick up a Life Sciences text book.
The next time I see Jesus on the other argument, steam is coming out of my ears. People assuming everyone is Christian, and would enjoy being taught the "Christian" bible. You cannot have religion taught in a public school, for the fact that everyone believes in something different. It's insulting to be honest.Posted by: AnonymousKeep Separate Church and State
The scientific basis for creationism having been well debunked time and again in the comments below me, I feel it's important to touch on another side of the issue. Christians, Jews, Muslims, I ask you; Why would you wish to relinquish your religion to government control? Were the pilgrims not seeking to avoid government regulation of religion when they first set sail for the new world?
You see, by thinking only in the short term, by getting caught up in the debate over whether or not creationism is scientifically valid you've missed the really important question: "Do I want the government in the business of teaching, regulating and disseminating my religion?"
Because, make no mistake, this is what you are asking for. By allowing the government to teach creationism you are leaving it up to them to teach your children about god. Why would you want this? Would you not be happier allowing your children to learn about the physical world at school- saving the religious talk for your home.
You see freedom of religion is freedom from religion and freedom FOR religion. If you believe the Earth is 6000 years old that's your right; both to believe it and to teach it to your children. It's your right to have the religion you chose, don't give that right away.
Keep church and state separate... for all our sakes.Posted by: Jburn89In 2012 this is still a question?
Teaching kids that some bronze-age sheep herders somehow had more knowledge of the physical world than we have now is just plain wrong. Also, it tells kids what to believe rather than how to think. I live in a state that has not had this come up yet but it may some day. Just terrible and sad that this discussion is happening in the year 2012.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is unscientifically illiterate.
Mathematics itself does not support any evidence whatsoever of there being a benevolent anything in the universe, there is likely no after life, nor is it probable that there is a creator. Evolution however can and has been scientifically tested and proven, after the laws of physics everything else is opinion. The laws of physics and evolution exist whether you choose to believe in them or not, science has spoken.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism isn't science. Doesn't belong in school.
Creationism is bullocks. If creationism is taught in schools, so should the principles of the Easter Bunny, Santa, and Big Foot.
Isn't the whole point of school to make the children brighter? Not stupider?
America is probably the only country where creationism is still taught in schools.Posted by: AnonymousThe Argument "Evolution Is Stupid" Doesn't Stand.
Everyone says that Evolution doesn't have any evidence to support it, WE HAVE MORE THAN CHRISTIANITY! We have years of looking into space, studying the Earth, even the moon and Mars! What to Christans have? A book. One single book that is supposed to be true because "it says it's true." That doesn't mean anything. You argument is invalid.
Posted by: Anonymousno
I dont think creation or evolution should be taught in schools both are theory and both are unproven..if science is exact then neither should be taught.
furthermore teachers become convinced one way or the other on thing we have been told were true..or untrue...who knows. everyone seems to be crashing creation theory....well, are we all idiot's it all theory all!!!!Posted by: AnonymousCreationism is faith, not science
Creationism has nothing to do with scientific facts, it's basically biblical facts supported by incoherent arguments. Religion has nothing to do with science; it answers to the question "why" instead of neutrally explaining a procedure (the question "how"). It is moreover unfair, for the other religions to promulgate christianity. This debate is nonsense.
Posted by: AnonymousScience class is for science
The theory of evolution was thought up using the scientific method making it okay to teach in a science class, no one says it is the absolute truth, science teachers will always admit that the things they teach may not be 100% accurate and may change based off future research. Creationism on the other hand is not based on the scientific method and so cannot be taught in a science class as if it was.
Posted by: Anonymousnonsense
There is no evidence what so ever that even suggests that creationism could be any viable explanation of the state of the world and its inhabitants. Schools are institutions of learning that should promote the discourse of real phenomena that can be observed and proven in science classrooms. There is no place for theology in science classes.
Posted by: AnonymousNo. Schools are supposed to teach, not create ignorance
It's absolutely ridiculous to teach superstition as science in schools. We send our children there to learn, not to be made dumb. If people want to raise their children to believe such ignorance send them to a religion based private school. I pay taxes and expect my education dollars to be used for the development of young minds. Not some fanatics pipe-dream!
Posted by: tonylock50Unscientific, based on unproven claims
We do not need children learning false information throughout their lives. What they do need are proven facts, backed up by what's literally a mountain of evidence. And to those wondering, evolution CAN be experimented. Just look it up on the internet or any biology textbook. It's not that hard.
Posted by: AnonymousNope
Creationism is a religious belief that seeks to over ride a scientific one. Therefore if schools want to teach it then they should do it in religion classes, not science. A scientific theory requires rigorous scrutiny and testing before it becomes widely accepted by the community. Creationists make extraordinary claims and expect as all to just believe them because 'god said it'.
Posted by: ObiWanTeach science, not religion in schools.
Who's intelligent design do we teach? The one where the christian god helped evolution along? The one where the christian god created man and woman in their current form?
How about we stick to facts and their theories rather than hearsay and superstition.Posted by: AnonymousScience!
It does not matter what 'some people' believe. It matters only what can be proven and what there is sufficient evidence for. It's called Science.
Posted by: AnonymousReligion has no place in a SCIENCE classroom
If we sacrifice scientific integrity, even in one aspect, we will digress as a society.
Posted by: Haskins.Hayden1Whats wrong with alchemy then?
Why dont we teach alchemy instead of chemistry? Atheism in christian schools? How come Islamic teachings arent taught as well? Creationism is completely illogical and to indoctrinate kids at a young age is just wrong. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever supporting creationism. Its all faith based, a theological standpoint. Its fine if you want to think that if you want but dont push it onto your kids.
Posted by: abcdefghijklmnopFaith based teachings should stay in Church
I'm not saying that students shouldn't learn about creationism all together, but they should be taught in a proper context: a myth and modern man course.
Posted by: luckybeagleCreationism isn't science.
It's just that simple. What experiment can we conduct to test a creationist claim? Creationism is a mere assertion, and has no place in a science curriculum.
Posted by: MopecoreAnyone who thinks the Bible is a textbook has never read it.
It's one thing to argue that an education system should be based on myths, but where do you draw the line? Should children be taught to stone their female teachers? That they shouldn't mock baldness in case God sends angry bears after them? Step back and just think about the concept of whether the most fashionable myth of the age should be taught in schools?
Posted by: NipplepissWhy?
Science in schools has to be selective in what it should teach. Evolution (whether people agree with it or not) is the vast consensus among biologists, with regards to the diversification of life. Creationism is simply a religiously motivated idea far outside the mainstream of scientific opinion. Until creationists persuade their peers in the typical way, this idea should get the same treatment as phlogiston.
Posted by: unitedandyCreationsm is a religious belief, not scientific
Evolution is a law, much the same as gravity.
Posted by: chococharCreationism isn't a scientific option
If you want to inform your children and indoctrinate them into your (incorrect) belief that natural selection isn't the way the world works, do that on your own time, in church.
A brief rebuttal to "I'm not talking about Sunday school". Whether you believe in a creator god who made the earth in seven days, or a god of all wisdom who merely needs to suck his thumb to unlock the secrets of the universe; your beliefs don't impact on scientific fact. As above, if you want your children to learn about Christian Creationism, Norse Ice-Giant theory, or Early Greek Kaos theory (interestingly the closest here to the truth, aside from the personification of probability), don't do it in bloody science class. If you're in the USA, your constitution forbids it. If you're elsewhere in the world, I hope that common sense forbids it, too.Posted by: iltacomCreationism is not science.
Creationsim belongs in a mythology class alongside the greek, roman, and norse fairy tales.
Posted by: MaryGodfreeOnes a theory and ones a myth
Evolution is based on facts and changes to fit those facts. Creationism is not a theory its a religious myth, and if we have to learn about one religious myth we should learn about them all. We should teach that controversy.
Posted by: tyofsonTeach the controversy?
If we're going to be teaching ridiculous alternate "theories" then why stop at creationism? Might as well include flat Earth, geocentrism, etc. Facts should stand alone in school, no beliefs muddying it up.
Posted by: uberCreationism is not Science, and it is not good for the future of America.
America is losing the fight to be the best nation in the world. Its sad but true. I want more then anything for us to rise to the top again. but we CAN NOT get there by teaching children non-science. It is proven that statistically states that teach kids creationism next to evolution have lower SAT scores and do worse in outside of state colleges.
Posted by: leefanCreationism is not factual
we should not teach children to not believe in science
Posted by: nobodys98Don't teach religion in schools.
Religions are an archaic remain of an age when people can use the teaching of values that weren't possibly learn anywhere else than in church. As long at they oppose themselves to scientific process of though it can no longer be teach in school where only proven facts belong.
Accepting creationism in school will eventually lead to people trying to teach kids that the earth is probably flat ...Posted by: brainshakerA place for everything, and everything in its place.
Science is a methodology defined by the discovery and utilization of evidence to support an understanding of the natural world in which we live. Creationism is little more than a story used by those ignorant or opposed to the facts as they exist. There is no evidence supporting creationism, and nothing to be learned by the application thereof. Even if we were to assume that creationism had some merit from any biblical sense it does not stand in opposition to evolution, rather it is an easy route to avoid the more difficult topics of abiogenesis and the origin of matter. To take the point further, the concept of creation as derived from the abrahamic religions fails to address some very important points. The creation story narrowly describes the beginning of existence and the origin of the Jewish people. After the 7 days described in the first few verses it tells the story of how the first Jewish couple fell short of the expectations held by their creator god. After being cursed by this god one of their children commits an heinous act and is exiled, during this exile he encounters peoples that have seemingly existed for some time separated from the influence of the god described within the preceding story. Using this very basic overview of the information given in the creation story it becomes obvious that the story does not in fact even attempt to describe the origin of the human race, and in addition the omitted information pertaining to the development of the non jewish peoples causes us to wonder how the timetable of the 7 "day" creation story was even intended to be perceived. Science describes how humanity developed, physics explains how the universe may have come to exist, creationism poorly attempts to show how a certain minority of people are superior to the rest of humanity and therefore has no place in the science classroom, based neither on its substance not on its form.
Posted by: bigdamheroDo you teach science in Church?
No, science is not taught in Church. It is not a one way street here. If religion gets to have influence in the things that are taught in a public institution, then the public gets to say what happens to or in a religious institution.
Let's also consider which creation story would be "taught" if creationism is introduced to schools. It would most certainly be the Biblical account of creation, which A. goes against the Establishment clause and endorses a specific religious view and B. would deem those religious views held by students that aren't Christian (Muslim, Pagan, Buddhist, etc.)
If you want your child to learn creationism, teach it to them at home and let other kids get the quality education that they deserve.Posted by: caniflyjoveScience is about following the evidence.
As Ricky Gervais aptly said, "Science doesn’t concern itself with the non-existence of something. The periodic table of imaginary things would be too big for a classroom- infinitely big in fact, and rather pointless. It’s not trying to prove the non-existence of anything supernatural. All it knows is there is no scientific proof of anything supernatural so far. When someone presents a jar of God it will test it. If it finds some evidence of “godness” it will follow the evidence till it knows everything it can."
Creationism has nothing to do with science. It doesn't belong in a science class.Posted by: AnonymousEvolution shall NEVER be teached in schools!!!
Evolution has no true or real theory what so ever. It should definitly NOT be teached in Science! Schools teaches facts not theorys!
Posted by: Zacmoo0007Nothing is taught in school that is not backed up by evidence.
There is a lot of concrete evidence that evolution is occurring. Yes, you can call the bible evidence, but that is only one piece of evidence, and it is solely based on belief.
Posted by: AnonymousEvolution is a fact
To say that it is biased to teach evolution alone would be like saying it is biased to teach only that the Earth is round without also teaching the alternate theory that it is flat. Creationism is not even a valid theory, let alone a fact.
Posted by: AnonymousCreationism has no scientific basis.
Creationism is not based at all on science. The only thing it's based on is an impossibly literal translation of a 3000 year old book of myths. Should we also teach the creation myths of other religions in science classes? How would fundamentalists feel about that? We are a religiously free society, not a theocracy. The Bible is only a holy book to some people, to others it's just a book. Only Evolution has a scientific basis, and it is well enough observed and understood to be considered factual. There is no scientific debate regarding the facts of evolution, the only debate is fabricated by people who want to impose their own religious agendas into mainstream thought.
Posted by: AnonymousUse your cerebral cortex we developed it for a reason.
A theory is an "analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one anothe?" According to merriam-webster dictionary. Creationism and their ideas are beliefs no amount of belief will make an idea fact. Creationism should not be taught in school for I am an American and it would be unconstitutional to teach a religious belief in a government funded school. I do believe that, if asked, teachers should be allowed to answer questions about religious ideas of intelligent design or creationism.
Posted by: Anonymous