Who believes that Creationism should be taught in public schools?

Question

I heard a lot about this debate a while ago... about people wanting creationism taught in science class as an alternative to evolution.

To me this doesn't make sense. Would children not simply go to a religious school? Also religious people do not think creationism is science, so where is the argument that it should be taught in a science class?

Even if I were christian I would hold these views: science and religion are not the same and therefore should not be taught together.

Thanks to those that gave thoughtful answers.

Answer 1

If the Bible is true....then obviously science would HAVE to coincide with it. So any Christian who does not believe in science is an idiot and a contradictor of their ownselves! The theory of creationism is just as religious at the theory of evolution. Both absolutely have to be believed by faith; niether one has ever been proven and they never will be proven to an individual until the time of death or, per the Bible, Christ comes back. I know creationist who do not profess Christianity or any other mainstream religion. I do not know an atheist who does not have faith in their theory! The theory of creationism is just as much science as the theory of evolution. The difference is that the theory of evolution is taught as fact in the public schools. Even though it has never been proven it is presented as absolute truth in the text books! Go figure...noone can prove to me either one way scientifically! It would seem possible that either of these could be proven by the facet of faith...not fact...

Answer 2

Well just like there's religion and state, I believe that those two should be separated. Public school's usually have a diverse ethnic and religious range of people. Some might agree and some might take a huge offense to the whole creationism. Me personally think that the teachers should express their own views, but not force the kids to believe what the teacher believes. As a matter of fact, I think the fact that they argue about such a debated topic is good. I believe that if the students argue about topics such as these, they can compare from their own beliefs and decipher what they believe. Even though I am catholic, I don't think there was an Adam & Eve, but the fact that I discused this subject with other people, I formed my own personal views. All in all I think teachers may adress the subject of creationism, but not to tell the students what they can or cannot believe.

Answer 3

If you're going to teach the Book of Genesis in a public school, then teach it in an elective religion, mythology, or literary studies class. It should NOT be taught in a science class because it simply is NOT science.

Creationism does NOT: 1) allow for a hypothetical example that could falsify it, 2) follow the scientific method, nor 3) tell us any consistent and predictable results that we can find in other branches of science. Creationism is a theocratic political campaign, and consists of nothing more than failing attempts at trying to disprove evolution by pretending to find loopholes.

Science is NOT a democratic process. I know people hate to hear that, but that's how it is. Newton's three laws of motion, the Pythagorean theorem, E=mc^2, and evolution are not "opinions" whose validity is determined by voting!

If you're going to teach it as an "alternative to evolution" then you might as well teach alchemy as an "alternative to Chemistry", or the views of Neo-Nazi holocaust deniers in history class.

Answer 4

Teaching a lie (i.e. evolution), isn't good. So creationism would be nice to have it be taught in schools, but then comes in the "which creationist religion to teach?" problem comes up, cause the Christians won't want Islam taught, and Judaism won't want Christianity taught, etc. So that's where I don't know :$.

I might be wrong in a part of this, but the Quran leads the way to science, so how can you say they are not the same?

Answer 5

The only viable alternative to Creationism is evolution. Though widely accepted, evolution is still a "theory" and not a "fact".

A science class should emphasize that evolution is still a theory and, as such, there are alternate ideas, one of the primary alternate ideas being Creationism. But I believe the discussion of Creationism in a public school class should end with the teacher saying that a church or synagogue is a more proper place to learn this alternate theory.

Then the lesson should return to evolution....

Answer 6

I think truth is truth and children should not be dogmatically told that the 'theory' of evolution is a fact. Then proceed on teaching it as so. This does not mean they should have religion forced upon them because religion is a personal choice not a school subject.

Wouldn't it be honest and fair to teach kids. Some scientists believe this is the answer for man's existence and others do not. They believe in a Creator. And leave it at that. Give children the option of choice and thought.

Answer 7

I don't think it should be taught because I'm not sure I want a non-believer teaching my kids about creation. I have no idea what kind of spin would be put on it, with what attitute it would be discussed, etc. I would much rather that teachings of Jesus and creationism were left up to someone I know has studies the matter and holds the creationist belief.

However, I don't think that evolution should be taught as the only possible way that humans originated. I don't think it is difficult to say that there are other theories about the origin of live and that evolution is not accepted by everyone.

Answer 8

I do not see the need to teach creationism in the schools. My biggest objection is that the evolutionary theory is taught as FACT, not THEORY. There is a very big difference that is constantly being ignored. Some science is accurate and will stand the test of time. Other so called scientific facts have not and will not stand the test of time as new "discoveries" are made. I would much prefer that people of faith in God would teach their children at home about God and their future. They also need to teach their children the radical difference between fact and theory.

Answer 9

I absolutely agree with you. Unfortunately, you're probably just preaching to the converted.
The best evidence we have strongly points to evolution (overwhelmingly in fact). 21 species of elephants have disappeared and 2 species survived today. What is more logical to believe? That God made 23 kinds of elephants but that he only meant for two to survive into the Christian era, or that those other 21 forms represent evolutional ancestors of the elephants we know today?
We don't teach Aristotelian physics, we don't teach acupuncture in medical school and we don't give equal time to astrology in science class. And neither should we give it to creationism. Creationism is not about looking for knowledge It's about certain people being uncomfortable with certain notions. One of which being that we are, in fact, part of the animal kingdom.

Answer 10

I agree, that's why I propose not teaching creationism in schools, but either taking out all of the lies and questionable 'science' that supports the religious belief of evolution or just taking it out of the curriculum entirely. Whichever is best.