Creationism vs Evolution in public schools

[freethinker83]

What do you think should be taught in public schools regarding the origin of life: creationism? evolution? a combination? neither? something else? What class should these things be taught in?

As you would guess I fully support the teaching of evolution in science classes. I am not against creationism being taught in a public school, I personally don’t believe a science class is the appropriate place because it is not science. I have no problem with a required “world religions” class that goes through the major world religions and explains their beliefs and viewpoints.

Also, what do you think of other “alternate theories” such as aliens planting us here being taught in school?

Remember the poll is anonymous!

As with other posts of mine I am simply trying to learn different viewpoints. Peace.

 

[Em_in_FL]

You do realize that it’s okay for Catholics to believe the theory of Evolution, right?

 

[freethinker83]

You do realize that it’s okay for Catholics to believe the theory of Evolution, right?

I am aware of this, yes. I would just like to know various opinions on what should be taught in public schools.

 

[ZxM]

, I personally don’t believe a science class is the appropriate place because it is not science. I have no problem with a required “world religions” class that goes through the major world religions and explains their beliefs and viewpoints.

 

[Mary_Christ]

I have burned out the evolutionists. All they talk about is how the person was forms out of some kind of natural selection. Well then, how did the plants and food and trees and algae evolve. After all if man was developed out of natural selection plants also must have evolved. How did the pear tree first start and was it a pear that fell and was changed into a potato? Or did the orange come first and then change into the apple? Or maybe it was the grape, maybe the grape fell from the tree and under the drying of the sun changed into a raisin and children who were the offspring of Adam and Eve picked them up and said yum-yun.

Then of course the question is asked about the skeleton of Adam. If anyone finds a skeleton with a missing rib, we all know this is Adam.

 

[freethinker83]

I have burned out the evolutionists. All they talk about is how the person was forms out of some kind of natural selection. Well then, how did the plants and food and trees and algae evolve. After all if man was developed out of natural selection plants also must have evolved. How did the pear tree first start and was it a pear that fell and was changed into a potato? Or did the orange come first and then change into the apple? Or maybe it was the grape, maybe the grape fell from the tree and under the drying of the sun changed into a raisin and children who were the offspring of Adam and Eve picked them up and said yum-yun.

Then of course the question is asked about the skeleton of Adam. If anyone finds a skeleton with a missing rib, we all know this is Adam.

Although I would love to address some of your points, I am not looking to debate the validity of evolution as I don’t want this thread to become heated and banned. I simply asked what you thought should be taught in public schools. You do not seem to make that clear in your response.

 

[dconklin]

Considering the fact that Catholic schools teach evolution, the same should be expected of public schools.

 

[Cat_Herder]

Public schools are not allowed to establish any form of religion, including atheism.

If non-theistic evolution is taught alone, atheism is established.
If creationism is taught, theism is established.

The only solution is to teach theistic evolution (“some other theory”) and use a neutral term like “First Cause” or “Prime Mover” to refer to God.

 

[Em_in_FL]

I am aware of this, yes. I would just like to know various opinions on what should be taught in public schools.

Okay, cool… then, to answer your questions…

What do you think should be taught in public schools regarding the origin of life: creationism? evolution? a combination? neither? something else? What class should these things be taught in?

**As you would guess I fully support the teaching of evolution in science classes. I am not against creationism being taught in a public school, I personally don’t believe a science class is the appropriate place because it is not science. I have no problem with a required “world religions” class that goes through the major world religions and explains their beliefs and viewpoints. **

I can agree with that…

Also, what do you think of other “alternate theories” such as aliens planting us here being taught in school?

Theories are only useful when backed up by some *significant *evidence.

 

[freethinker83]

Public schools are not allowed to establish any form of religion, including atheism.

If non-theistic evolution is taught alone, atheism is established.
If creationism is taught, theism is established.

The only solution is to teach theistic evolution (“some other theory”) and use a neutral term like “First Cause” or “Prime Mover” to refer to God.

Atheism is not a religion. All it means to be an atheist is that one does not believe in a god or gods. Beyond this atheists can hold a wide array of beliefs. There are atheists who believe we were put here by aliens and all sorts of other bizarre things.

The public schools I went to taught a non-theistic evolution. It does not establish any religion, it simply makes no mention of a God. The theory of evolution makes no claim as to the existance or non-existance of a God, it is therefore neutral-theistic if such a thing exists.

 

[lao_tzu]

You do realize that it’s okay for Catholics to believe the theory of Evolution, right?

There’s a world of difference between what’s allowed and actual practices. While Catholics are allowed to believe in biological evolution, nearly half don’t.

Religious Differences on the Question of Evolution

View attachment 9688

As ever, Jesse

 

[Iron_Donkey]

I don’t think creationism should be “taught” at all in any school at this time. Whether it’s true or not, it’s not scientifically accepted, and those who support and research it should focus on this before anything else. There needs to be some good solid peer reviewed science before it starts getting presented in class rooms to those of us who could only have a surface understanding of the science anyway. Of course, I have no problem with it being mentioned as an idea some people are working on, but unless and until it is more widely accepted by the scientific community as a whole I do not think it should be taught in the way that science is usually taught.

I don’t think it should be taught in a religious studies class because it classifies itself as science. Though again, I do not have a problem with something along the lines of “some people who follow certain religions tend to prefer these theories,” but going into the theories in detail, to me, seems out of place.

I do think evolution should be taught in science classes because it is the currently accepted theory, but, because there is/was controversy surrounding the issue, with the conditions that:

1. it be mentioned some reasonable people don’t agree with the theory of evolution and
2. that the course emphasize that the class is covering the theory itself, which way or may not be true, so that a person who does not believe the theory is true can in good conscience answer questions about it on an exam with having to explicitly contradict what he believes, and finally
3. that it be emphasized that science is always changing and that no theory is set in stone.

To preempt the almost standard “do you think that about gravity” response to number 3, the answer is yes. Particularly because, while we have relativity as a pretty good model for gravity on some scales, we have no idea how it relates to quantum stuff and are in the process of changing that right now. (to be more clear, we have some ideas, but we’re nowhere near, last I heard, even being able to start testing them)

I voted evolution only, and tend to accept the theory as probably true. To be honest, I’m actually not really interested in whether it’s true or not, but I find the controversy surrounding the question fascinating.

 

[Cat_Herder]

Atheism is not a religion.

Then you have no legal right to be an atheist.
First Amendment to the US Constiution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

If you have the right to practice X, the public school cannot establish X to the exclusion of all other religions. It is that simple.

The public schools I went to taught a non-theistic evolution. It does not establish any religion, it simply makes no mention of a God.

“Humans developed over millions of years through natural selection alone” = atheism.

 

[freethinker83]

Then you have no legal right to be an atheist.
QUOTE]

Can you please explain how this is true? It is covered under freedom of speech in the first amendment. That is like saying you have no right to be a Democrat or to enjoy the music of Bing Crosby.

 

[Cat_Herder]

Can you please explain how this is true? It is covered under freedom of speech in the first amendment. That is like saying you have no right to be a Democrat or to enjoy the music of Bing Crosby.

The public schools do not force graduates to register as Democrats or force the band to play Bing Crosby to the exception of all other artists.

However, many force the students to write “man evolved over millions of years through natural selection alone” as their exam answer and penalize or otherwise disallow the STUDENT’S freedom of expression to add God to the answer.

 

[lao_tzu]

Then you have no legal right to be an atheist.

First Amendment to the US Constiution: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion …

Says right here the Congress is prohibited from choosing any religion for me. That’s the right to be an atheist.

As ever, Jesse

 

[freethinker83]

The public schools do not force graduates to register as Democrats or force the band to play Bing Crosby to the exception of all other artists.

However, many force the students to write “man evolved over millions of years through natural selection alone” as their exam answer and penalize or otherwise disallow the STUDENT’S freedom of expression to add God to the answer.

I think the key words you are using are “natural selection alone”. I don’t think many science classes force that. If place the period before the word “alone” I think you are fine and it doesn’t offend anyone as it takes no stance on the supernatural.

When evolution is being taught, I see nothing wrong with a student answering “man evolved over millions of years through natural selection.” This simply demonstrates the understanding of the theory. You mention freedom of expression to add God to the answer. Understanding a theory and freedom of expression are two entirely different things.

I would also have no problem with a correct answer in a philosophy or religion class stating, “Christians believe God created Adam in his own image.”

 

[Cat_Herder]

Says right here the Congress is prohibited from choosing any religion for me. That’s the right to be an atheist.

As ever, Jesse

Atheism is a religion. If you disagree go talk to the Seventh Circuit. But don’t expect them to reverse themselves as the Supreme Court has already held secular humanism to be a religion. And if you do manage to get them to accept your definition of atheism, don’t be surprised when you find yourself unable to run for office or sign an oath because you are an atheist and unable to claim constitutional protection.

You can’t have it both ways, my friend.

 

[AnaTurin]

Only theories that can be tested by scientific methods should be taught in a science class.

All the various views on God creating the universe should be taught in a religion class. There are many different theories on God creating the universe, even within Christianity.

I completely believe that God created everything, but I don’t want my beliefs (or a Hindu version of creation, or a Muslim view of creation etc.) to be taught in a public school science class.

 

[Cat_Herder]

Only theories that can be tested by scientific methods should be taught in a science class.

All the various views on God creating the universe should be taught in a religion class. There are many different theories on God creating the universe, even within Christianity.

I completely believe that God created everything, but I don’t want my beliefs (or a Hindu version of creation, or a Muslim view of creation etc.) to be taught in a public school science class.

Which is why I suggest teaching theistic evolution with a neutral term for God. If no reference is made to the Prime Mover then the school is teaching atheism and thus establishing a religion.