I don't see why not. Of course, if you're referring to doctrinally unsound ideas which the mainstream always calls science, then doing forcing it upon such schools would be a clear violation of the Establishment Clause.
I wouldn't call it real science, but yes. The Establishment Clause (or at least the contemporary interpretation of the Establishment Clause) is a contract. No religion may elevate itself in the Government and act as though it's the state religion. In exchange, the Government must stay out of religious practice and belief, even if that belief contradicts what the secular majority calls science.
Public Schools should not be allowed to teach exclusively Evolution either. A sizable minority of Americans believe that Evolution violates their beliefs. They pay taxes too. Students who don't believe in it should be taught Evolution, those who do should have the other option. This idea is not a violation of the Establishment Clause. It's called fair accommodation.
By the way, insulting me will not accomplish anything productive.
That's because scientific illiteracy is a problem in the USA. People who want to teach creation in secular public schools are only going to make it worse. You can't teach religious concepts in secular state-owned public schools.
By "faith school" you must mean a religious private school, which means you agree with me.
Non-establishment does not depend on what the majority of the scientific community says. They do not run this country. It relies upon what the Establishment Clause says. If 50% of Americans wanted to believe in a flat Earth. That's their right, according to the Establishment Clause.
But they have to be open to secular ideas and they can't be entirely brainwashed by propaganda. This is why common core standards are essential, one of them should include teaching Evolution and other scientific concepts. I don't care if you want to live in your fantasy world of mythology, but at least give the right to an unbiased secular education.
Evolution is atheistic, and it violates religious belief, which is not secular at all, because it establishes tenets of a certain religion (or the whole religion) as being false. Please learn what secularism actually means. It isn't synonymous with atheism.
I don't agree with those people who seek to teach Creationism in public school classrooms and not evolution; this too is a violation of the Establishment Clause because it pushes religious doctrine over atheism.
Creationism is the idea that the Universe was created by a deity. It isn't exclusive to any single religion. Those who hold that viewpoint should be taught that, and those who don't should not.
Many religious people hold evolution to be compatible with their faith, yes. But a ton of religious people do not, and I don't see what that has to do with them.
I get what you're saying, but Evolution doesn't imply god is fake as there is a concept of theistic Evolution. Science is taught in schools, and Evolution is a part of science. You could easily deny many other scientific concepts in the name of god, then push that in public schooling.
Creationism doesn't even imply that God exists. The creator could be an alien, or a very powerful being who isn't God, or the Universe could be a computer used by a gigantic fat alien named Mike. One advocate of atheistic ID/Creationism was Sir Fred Hoyle.
Science is a subject in school, and what's taught in Science is what most scientists have found evidence for and tested. The Constitution's church state seperation just means that the state can't control religious beliefs. And that the church and dictate laws based on religion, it's not unconstitutional to teach science in school.
It's not just that but we should teach what's true in schools. Evolution is true, creationism is false. You have no proof of creation and the only proof you have is distorting pieces of evidence like fossils in your favor.
1. "We have no evidence for Creationism" is just a statement.
2. Scientific Consensus does not make it true, and even if it were to make it probably true people have the right to the dissenting opinion. The current system is oppresively majoritarian and intolerant.
3. Proclaiming "it's the real science" doesn't excuse pushing it past the Establishment Clause.
It doesn't violate the first ammendment. If we really were going to teach Creation and say it's "free speech," then we should teach literally every possible explanation for everything. That would include teaching holocaust denial in social studies.
You imply that teaching only one worldview on human origins is a violation of free speech. That means we should teach literally every explanation and worldview on everything. That would include teaching racism or holocaust denial.
If you are so utterly confident in the truth of Evolution, how about we have a debate on the subject? I am a scientist by no means, so I will most probably lose. However, perhaps I can get you to think for yourself a bit.
@Vox_Veritas I think for myself and I would consider the possibility of Creation if I saw proper evidence. And no, i'm currently in a debate on Evolution and Creation and I don't want to flood my debates with a bunch of creation-evolution debates.
I don't see why people claim that under secularism evolution should not be taught. It's very different from a belief or opinion that secularism protects us from. Evolution is a scientific theory supported by mountains and mountains of evidence.