Should a museum on Creationism be allowed?

Question

mu·se·um /myuˈziəm/ –noun a building or place where works of art, scientific specimens, or other objects of permanent value are kept and displayed.
In Alberta a museum of Creationism was rescently built. I understand there are several in the U.S. already.
Should governments who are responsible for neutrality between religion and state allow specifically biased public domained museums?
Now I believe the institution of museums are to be held at a higher calibur than private institutions. Museums are a public (on a global scale) referrence to actual historic events, natural catalogs and/or artistic expression. All of these have the common premise of being factual.
Should specific fringe groups be allowed to alter history as they see it? If yes to Semetic philosophy then should other religions (Pagan creationism?) also be allowed?
Would this not deminish the standard that museums have historically set?
What about an anti-holocaust museum?

Answer 1

Do you think the government should be in the business of deciding what museums should be allowed? I live in Southeast Michigan, home to the Arab American National Museum, the Holocaust Memorial Center, the Museum of African American History and many more devoted to certain elements of culture, history and science. What if the government, or certain groups, decide those museums are not valid because they don't fit with their predetermined ideas? Should we let racists and bigots call for the closing of the Arab American or African American Museums? Should we let Holocaust deniers call for the closing of the Holocaust Memorial Center?

Just because you hold a different view on the creation of the universe, you should not be able to suppress the free speech of those who hold a different view. They have every right to present their theories through exhibits in this museum.

Answer 2

They can call them "museums" all they want, but they are saying that science proves THEIR beliefs, when science proves exactly the opposite. This "museum" was privately funded (right?) so no taxpayer money was involved in building it (I hope!). Someone with common sense will be able to see through the nonsense. One of their claims is that the Earth is only 6,000 years old, which makes the 30,000 year old cave paintings in Europe a serious problem, and the 50,000 year old Aboriginal tribes of Australia an even bigger problem. Nonsense is nonsense - just because its in a building somebody calls a "museum" doesn't mean its scientifically legitimate. Perhaps the American Association for the Advancement of Science and other organizations should have a "seal of approval" for museums to separate the real ones from the crackpots.

Answer 3

If you'll allow the chart of monkey evolving into man in a museum, you'll allow anything. If you'll allow the lies of Piltdown and Nebraska man into museums and Darwin's lies, you'll allow anything.

Common premise of being factual to an evolutionist is a joke. When have evolutionists been factual?

If we allow a museum of waxed Hollywood stars and the like, why can't the Creator of the universe have a museum?

God has exalted Jesus, and given Him a name which is above every name. That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

You have turned your ears away from the truth, and you have turned unto fables, lies, untruth, created math, assumptions, theories and guesses.

In the USA at one time a Bible could be found everywhere with the Ten Commandments hanging on walls alongside the Beatitudes. The spirit of the antichrist within the ungodly are removing these from the USA today. I welcome every Creation Museum because we have a Creator.

Answer 4

"other objects of permanent value are kept and displayed" bieng the operative term here.

anyone who gets funding can set up a museum and they are likely going to be a not for profit.

Guess what however- the Mel gibson hates the jews museum (aka: the anti-holocaust museum, or the nazi-mel museum), will probably as a practical matter have a problem getting that status from the IRS. Papers can get "lost" easily or just plain rejected.

Also there needs to be enough patrons to support the museum in order for it to not have to close its doors as no matter how "devout" people are- they still require money to eat and feed thier families and don't work for free.

Oh, wait, i screwed up- there really is a god, god is green and has lots of pretty pictures on it as well as pictures of dead U.S. presidents.

Answer 5

I believe all of these creation museums have been privately funded, so technically, they are free to build them. I wouldn't want the government to tell someone they can't build a religious museum, since that does infringe on people's rights.

However, I do see your point about just letting people build "museums" about whatever they want. I have imagined that since these groups are getting away with their own version of history, that another group, KKK perhaps, would build their own version as well.

We can only hope that most intelligent people see those creation museums for what they are...entertainment.

Answer 6

I don't think government money should go into these "museums." But if no government funding is used then they are sufficiently separate from the state.

I'm not sure if the use of the word "museum" in the names of these institutions is appropriate. If they present their theories AS THEORIES, then I suppose that they are still museums as long as the information given about the items on exhibit is factual.

Answer 7

What is your problem! So what! People got together, pooled their money and opened a museum. You have such a problem, go to a normal museum and "ohh" and "ahh" at the Evolution theory in there. They have as much a right to showcase what they believe in as anyone else. How would you feel if a museum opened up that showed what you believe in (and I don't care what that is), and all you got was flack for it.

"Oh, should this be allowed? It's not what I believe, there fore it shouldn't be allowed!" That's what you're saying. You don't like it, tough! It's not your money and no one is forcing you to go there.

Answer 8

It depends on who finances the museum. If it's privately built on private property, there's nothing wrong with that.
If it's paid for with tax dollars, I would be 100% against it.
I believe that others should build those museums that you mention, if on private ground and with private funds.
I wonder about an anti-holocaust museum, though. I'm really digging through my mind trying to come up with something that might be displayed in it. Sorry, blank.

Answer 9

I personally don't mind them having a building with the history of creationist beliefs inside it that people can come and visit.

It's the moment they start presenting it as the unequivocal truth that it starts becoming unacceptable.

Science museums are based on the scientific method - i.e. testing the most plausible theory available to an acceptable degree of accuracy.

Creationist museums that present their beliefs (note: beliefs, not proven facts - since it requires faith to believe in god) as true is deliberately misleading the public and impressionable young minds.

Answer 10

A building dedicated to promotion creationism or any idea should be allowed as long as it doesn't use public funding to do so.

As for calling is a museum I would say they shouldn't but that would be a pain in the rear of a legal battle