No, science should be taught in science class and "intelligent design" isn't science. That can be taught in church.
"Intelligent design" is neither!
2007-02-04 16:40:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by Author Unknown 6
·
6⤊
0⤋
no because it is faith not science. i would be ok if they gave a little disclaimer about religion in the science class, something like this,
"we understand that many students may have moral or religious beliefs that conflict with the theory of evolution. it is not out intent to try to teach any religion of anything trying to disprove religion.
the science of biological evolution is taught as a fact that has much scientific proof.
however the idea that humans evolved from some other life form is not a scientific fact. this is a theory that had many possibilities and we will explore them briefly. If you wish your children to be excused from this paticular portion of the class please sign below and we will arrange an alternate scientific class for them on this day.
thank you very much"
i do not think that we need religion being taught in our schools, there are way too many religions to try to cater to. stick with academics.
2007-02-05 00:50:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Intelligent design is NOT science, I repeat Intelligent design is NOT science. intelligent design AKA creationism belongs in a religious studies where it can be studied OBJECTIVELY alongside other major world religions. It would be unfair and misleading to teach intelligent design in a science class because there is nothing scientific about it . Simple
2007-02-05 01:08:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by renegade4141 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
It's a theory. If you're going to deal in theories, ALL theories should be presented.
The problem is that science is afraid of it, because when it put it side by side and tell people we are either a LUCKY ACCIDENT made from CHEMICALS or designed by a superior intellegence, which theory is going to look the weakest, especially since superior intellegence DESIGNS things like TV sets and Fuji Apples while science has NEVER made life out of chemicals in the lab.
The scientific explaination requires FAR more FAITH than the religious one.
2007-02-05 01:05:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
If the total lesson includes ALL of the 'intelligent results'
Such as: Brain tumors in 2 year old children, lumbar disc disease, hemorrhoids in upright quadroped designed beings (humans) cancer, MS, ALS, Trisomy 21, Horner's syndrome, ulcers, blindness, deafness, Schizophrenia, etc...
Perhaps these defects are just part of Gawduh's plan? Or they have developed along the way as evolution works out the kinks?
:)
2007-02-05 00:45:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by Bob 3
·
3⤊
0⤋
No No NO!
Intelligent design is not a science, nor a fact...there is ZERO evidence proving scientific design.
2007-02-05 00:41:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by Iceplayr 4
·
4⤊
0⤋
No, it is the job of parents to teach it. If they will not, or cannot due to lack of a proper education from their own church, that is a problem for them to handle. In the JWs, the children are taught by the parents, so don't need it in school. They could teach it, as they are also learning how to teach. The children are also taught about evolution.
2007-02-05 00:42:18
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
no, because it is based on the creation myth in the bible and is by no means scientific. nothing makes any kind of scientific sense. there is no repeatable evidence, no reliable tests, and moreover there is a HUGE amount of evidence to prove it wrong. it is theology, not science; and should not be treated as such. Intelligent Design is just a trick used by die-hard bible thumpers to get god into public schools.
2007-02-05 00:41:21
·
answer #8
·
answered by Dashes 6
·
4⤊
0⤋
It's not science, so no.
Possibly it could be taught in a philosophy class
2007-02-05 02:51:52
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I won't argue that it should be since Intelligent design is based off religion, but in that sense they should not tell students that evolution is a fact when it is not. Nor is there a huge amount of evidence to support it. Not repeatable evidence nor reliable testable evidence. Evolution is hypothesis with a lot of supposition in the middle to link their "facts"
2007-02-05 00:50:39
·
answer #10
·
answered by mark g 6
·
0⤊
1⤋