If creationism is taught in science, is it only fair to teach atheism in religious education?

Question

I have a feeling there will be more atheists than theists if this were to happen.

Atheism is often found as an option in questionnaires where they ask about your religion.

Plus it fits perfectly into RE in that it's teaching a different point of view (if the creationists can put that forward for it to be taught in science, so can I).

What would I teach? Atheism 101:
- Holes in the bible
- Why religion is invented
- FSH / IPU
- Why no religions are special
- Thinking logically about something rather than listening to any old cr@p and taking it as real.

Answer 1

very interesting, and I actually changed my mind before I started writing this.

To me, creationism should not be taught anywhere, period, because it is preposterous, untrue, misleading and really doesn't belong in a serious educational institution. If Christians insist on teaching it to their kids, there is nothing anyone can really do, but it is a hell of a disservice to the kids.

As to atheism, I think it would be appropriate to teach in religious education, ie, a course on religions and various thoughts and positions about religions, including the idea that god doesn't exist. This is a part of theological thinking and the curriculum should,in my opinion, include it.

Answer 2

I think presenting both sides of the issue are vital if we are to be critical thinkers. Creation should be taught in science, because it is not necessarily a religious belief. It often is, but the theory that an intelligent force created life on this planet does not by definition implicate God (or a god) as the source. It merely implies that it did not come about by random chance, and that someone or something caused it all to begin. Could be aliens. Could be us in the distant future using a temporal wormhole. Could be God. The point isn't WHO did it, only that the possiblity exists that it may not be random. So yes, it is fair to teach intelligent design in schools.

Likewise, a religious education course should teach a variety of religious beliefs, including Atheism. If people are aware of and understand other beliefs, they'll understand their own that much more. Ignorance breeds ignorance, after all.

Answer 3

Evolution isn't a theory on the creation of the universe, it is a theory explaining the diversity of life. I would be happy to have an alternate theory to explain the diversity of life taught in biology, but, unfortunately, there isn't one. At best, ID is a hypothesis - a theory needs evidence. The reason I say "at best" is because creationism (both Christian and Pastafarian) go against science in general, not just evolution. In order for everything (light, celestial bodies etc) to be where they are now if a much smaller time frame than the age of the universe (about 13 billion years) is used, say Christianity (6000 years) or Pastafarianism (last thursday) everything would have to move substantially faster. By faster we are talking 220000000% faster (than currently calculated speeds). If this was the case almost all physics based on the work of Einstein and Newton would be made invalid. Of course, there are far more examples I could give, but the physics one is probably the easiest to explain. In other words, no, ID should not be taught in science classes because of the following reasons: a)It is not a theory, it is at best a hypothesis. b)It contradicts not just evolution, but most of all established science (Most space based physics, all of chemistry (6000 years is not enough time for a star to die, and without stellar death, no Elements heavier than iron can exist), almost all of geology (radiation, used for dating does not work, as no radioactive elements could have been created) and, of course, biology. I say if we teach it at all, teach it in religious studies. ___Response to additional details___ The bible does - Archbishop Usher worked it out. Of course, it may not be entirely accurate, given some of the people recorded early in the bible supposedly lived for hundreds of years. If you want to teach ID, you may as well show up the whole ridiculousness of it, rather than making it seem to make some sense.

Answer 4

I'm Agnostic so find your idea of teaching "Holes in the bible" a good idea we all hated RE! (even me who at the time was religious)
They don't for my liking teach them about enough about the many religions we have today!
Paganism (basis for most christian religions)
Muslim (stop the ignorance about this religion)
currently it's your main christian way of thinking thats taught and a light skim over the other stuff!
They say they want the children to be challenged
How can we better challenge them but to give them all the information all the theories all the options and let them choose there own way of thinking instead of only teaching what they chose to believe and glossing over the other stuff!
So you have a good idea here but its a small part of whats wrong with the schools RE Curriculum

Answer 5

I'm all for teaching atheism alongside major world faiths (and some minor and/or historical ones too). I feel it's only right that in religious studies, which after all lends itself to historical and philosophical open-mindedness, there should be an understanding of both rational and dogmatic atheism.

Science on the other hand doesn't hold with such openness of interpretation. It believes in building a bedrock of fact. That being so, I'd object to creationism being taught in science classes.

Answer 6

I think that's fair. Atheism is sort of a religion. You might say communism doesn't believe in capitalism. If it didn't believe in anything, isn't that a form of existentialism. You could call it a religion, if your religious about it, or hypocrisy if your not. Everything is connected or else nothing is connected or both, or even neither, depending on how you look at it. And Disney should get honorable mention under religions believing in cartoon charaters. Like someone believes in Tinker Bell. I think she's too immature myself. I think of religion as when anyone gets so sure they want to kill. lol You could say atheists believe in logic and what they can prove, since they all say that, so they do believe in something. A balance person doesn't get so mad over a discussion so they've gone beyond reason to faith, that their view is the only one. Sort of like the universe revolves around the earth and my thinking. Not really understanding the other side. I read where physicists don't see science as we do at all and consider themselves as believing in metaphysics. that's commonly believed to be religion.

Answer 7

Um, in my experience atheism is always covered in religion classes. I agree with the other answer that said your analogy is all wrong. In your analogy, it should be evolution that should be taught in religion. But this is also not so logical, because you are making the assumption that science and religion are somehow opposites. This isn't necessarily true, it's kind of like apples and oranges. Maybe you need to take philosophy 101.

Answer 8

How can one be taught a negative? My understanding of current education is that creationism is taught, if at all, as a possible explanation for the existence of the planet earth. Facts are presented and it is each individuals choice as to which or none 'religion' they choose? As for religious education - does that still happen in non-denominational schools? If so - then it shouldn't.

Answer 9

teach either but get the category straight what if you had to learn mathematics to determine you tithes wouldn't that be god awful . just kidding it's so much the set back to science that people fear but the inability to teach and learn on a level that is comparable to the rest of the world . should advanced virginal sacrificial rights be a subject as well you know other religions would want consideration as well as yours.
And does Walt Disney ,urban legend and the like deserve to be considered science as well.

Answer 10

atheism is natural while religions are drilled into minds!Which will be the winner in the long run for you to think/ A tip. You have seen people deceived by their religions ,have you seen any atheist so or living like animal farms.Further if you do not get me. At atheism there is freedom of thought and living while at religions there are shackles and only promises that to morrow will be better and tomorrow never comes! satisfied?