I know Palin has her critics, but is this so bad?

Question

Teaching creationism along with evolution seems to be a sticking point for many people. Why?

Isn't it wise to teach both theories without promoting any one above the other (I believe Intelligent Design should be taught as well) and allow the student, along with their parents/guardians if necessary, to form their own opinion?

After all, we either have faith in one or scientific fact in the other, both of which have their flaws. If parents/guardians disagree with their child being taught this, they should be allowed to not attend without repercussion. (IMO)

Please refrain from addressing other issues. Only answers pertaining to my question. Thanks!

Answer 1

If people want to learn creationism, they need to go to church.

A school is a place for facts.  Evolution is a fact.  Creationism is not.

Answer 2

No.  I am all for diversity of ideas, but Creationism has no place in a science classroom.  I am all for the teaching of different ideas as long as they are taught in the proper context.  Creationism belongs in a theological class, evolution belongs in a science class.

As far as parents disagreeing with having their kids taught about evolution, maybe they should be teaching their kids critical thinking skills and about the possibility that Creationism is the truth instead of sheltering their kids from reality.

Answer 3

I have no problem with explaining creationism in all it forms in some world religion class or history class, but not in the science classroom. There is nothing scientific about creationism. In general, we don't teach outdated ideas in science. We don't teach that the world is flat or that the earth is the center of the universe in science class, so why should we make an exception for creationism?

Answer 4

What if a large group of people believed that the moon was made of green cheese... do you think it would be good for all classrooms everywhere to be forced to teach that as a possible theory of the moon's composition?  In other words, just because a bunch of people believe something doesn't mean it should be taught or forced to be taught everywhere.  Science is humanity's best bet for classroom teaching... schools have never been good at teaching moral values or the beliefs that go into moral values, that would be the domain of church, family and spirituality instead.

Answer 5

Yes, there wouldn't be so much argueing if the schools would teach both.  Besides, you can see where our schools have gone since they've taken prayer out of them!  Kids need to hear about it all and make up their own minds.  

Answer 6

Creationism and science do not go hand-in-hand.  that is why its an issue.  You can teach creationsim in religious studies and nobody would have a problem.  Its when you throw it in with science that people have an issue (and should).  

Creationism (which would ecompass hundreds of different theories, litereally) is more in tune with a world religion class than a science class.

I did a thesis on this exact subject in college and came to the conclusion that teaching about the origin of species/life is meaningless in "grade schools."  Literally.  How does knowing how our species came into existence going to affect what 2+2 equals?  How will that affect the laws of gravity?  How will that affect proper english?

If both groups weren't dead-set on DEMANDING that their view was heard it would be easier to swallow...  Then again I am asking for people to set down their bias and just say "we don't know"

Answer 7

honestly im a baptist and i dont think there is a place for it in school...it should be at church if you go..if you dont why would you need to learn that..you open the door to that soon we are learning all kinds of odd things from other religions i dont want my kids learning...im also a republican...

Answer 8

I'm guessing that by "creationism" Palin means the creation story in the Bible.  But would she be fine if students were taught the Hindu versions of creation, or theories about aliens seeding life here on Earth?

Answer 9

/ That makes too much sense, therefore it won't make it.

A Camel is a horse designed by a committee.

  

Answer 10

Yes absoulutely!   Good question.