I just read the first page of the other religion topic about believing in god. However, I believe there is a more important question to ask here as a society (my personal viewpoint is that what you believe in is your business, and I shouldn't try to persuade you otherwise). Should we be teaching creationism (or you can use the buzzword intelligent design as if a name gives the idea anymore credence) in public schools? Here are some reasons why I believe that the subject should very obviously be not taught in public schools:

1. Nobody can prove the existence of a higher being. On the other hand, hard scientific evidence supports evolutionary claims and the big bang theory.
2. Intelligent design advocates claim that they're not promoting Christianity, but they would be. I don't think we'd hear any Hindu ideas in an American intelligent design class, do you?
3. I know this is going beyond the "official" intelligent design stance, but if they claim that god exists outside of science, why would they want to teach their theory of god in a science oriented classroom as opposed to a theology classroom?
4. The separation of church and state protects both America and the religions that have taken root here. Just because you believe in something neither makes you correct in your assumptions nor someone else's beliefs incorrect, and nobody should be allowed to dictate what everyone has to believe in. I think that it's a big enough sin that parents are allowed to instill in their children concrete ideas about religions, regardless of whether they believe in athiesm, Christianity, or the flying spaghetti monster. A spiritual journey is very personal, but I've no problem with parents bestowing upon their children a solid set of morals.

So what do you all think about teaching creationism in public schools?

I agree with everything you said there, Felagund.

COMPLETELY against it.

I think if Falkoner, or someone who strongly believes in religion as he does, comes into this topic and thinks creationism should be taught then things will get messy very fast.

Deity topic version 2.

I have no opinion about it. Infact I have no opinion about anything that has to do with "should we teach this or should we teach that in school?"


Because suppose they do teach <whatever subject/issue>, are people really going to believe what the school teaches them?


Take a look at D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education). We've been taught at a very young age that taking drugs and drinking alcohol is bad for you. We've also been taught how to face peer pressure and how to avoid such situations. But look at society today. How many people are going against the teachings of D.A.R.E.? Cigarettes today kill more people than do alcohol, other drugs, heart attacks, car accidents, etc (I remember seeing this somewhere; I just can't remember where). Everywhere on campus, there's ALWAYS someone walking around with a cigarette in his mouth, and while I was a cashier at a grocery store, 1 out of every 4 customers bought either beer, wine, or pure liquor. If teaching things at school supposedly "convert" you, then nobody would be doing drugs today.

Also, take a look at Health/Sex Education. We've been taught almost everything (and perhaps even a little too much) about STDs, how to prevent STDs, and how to have safe sex. Like with Drugs, we've been told that the safest way to prevent STDs is abstinence. We've also been taught that condoms are also a method of preventing them too. But look at society today. How many people, especially teenagers, are resorting to abstinence? How many teenage girls get pregnant every year? And look at how many people today have herpies, AIDs, and all these STDs? Again, if things taught at school are suppose to "convert" you and prevent you from going against their teachings, then there would be no sex today or no STDs going around.


Besides, if you teach Creationism at school, it's not like it's converting you (infact I dont even see how it could possibly convert you). It's like teaching any other subject; you learn about it; you learn about it's origin, how it works, and the history behind it, but you are not obligated to believe it. Like with History classes, we learn about communism, dictatorship, slavery, and even other religions; but being taught these things does not mean we are going to end up following/believing those things.

I agree with everything said. (Felagund's post)

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Sep 11 2007, 8:05 pm by moneylover.

Creationism teaches you nothing meaningful, and it's not even grounded in basic scientific principles. To call it "science" is a disgrace.

The closest thing I would agree with is it as an elective. Making it mandatory would be absurd.

I don't think that the problem is that it converts you, I think the problem is that it's being presented as a valid scientific theory. To use your religion example, there's a difference between learning that some cultures believe in a certain god and learning that a higher power created the universe.

Science is a class for generally accepted theories that have evidence to back up their conclusions, which creationism doesn't have.

Whether Creationism is a science or not is not the point. The point is that just because any subject (regardless of what kind of subject it is) is taught in school doesn't mean people will believe it.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Sep 11 2007, 8:14 pm by MillenniumArmy.

That doesn't mean it should be taught. If we taught pedophilia to our kids, whether they would become pedophiles is debatable, but it's still improper to teach.

Not once did I said it should be taught in school

No, of course not. I'm pretty sure teaching a subject that isn't even real is illegal in the first place. You don't see schools teaching about things like this, which essentially has the same amount of proof of existing as 'God' does.

I agree with Felagund and devilesk 100%.


I don't even really see how anyone could argue against it being taught as an elective. Parents have to sign off on the student's classes anyways, so that would stop anyone from being able to complain really. And yes, it is certainly nothing close to science.


I agree. In fact, lots of people would probably just consider it more absurd after being taught it in school. Still no justification for teaching it (not that you said that).

For me it boils down to who should be regulating public schooling... the federal or local government. This is what I think should be done.
If a large majority of residents living in a small town want it taught, they should be able to express it by a vote and have it taught in their local school if whatever measures are passed. HOWEVER, on the federal level, Congress should past regulations stating that Creationism and various other elements pertaining to religion must be taught in a RELIGION class, not in SCIENCE class.

To me I think none of the 2 (creationism and evolution) should be taught at schools. They both would start controversy for both sides. Take for instants the Simpson's episode where they started teaching creationism. It later effected the rest of the learning system. And then it would bring in more religions and other groups into the bowt.

At least here in Canada they don't teach any of those things in our science courses. Gosh bless Canada.

I agree with moose on the part that communities should control the schools, not the government. However I think that schools should teach both aspects, creationism and evolution simply because of the fact that they are both theoretical. Its only fair to teach people all points and views, not just one side. You CAN believe in creationism and evolutionism, just not in creationism and the big bang In the end I dont think that It will change much of peoples opinions but at least you provide them with a choice.

Well I can see people disagreeing even about any type of course that deals with religion being taught in a public school whether optional or not. I mean if you're going to have an elective about one religion, you'd have to include all religions. If it's solely on creationism (I don't even see how you can have a whole course on just creationism, lulz storytime everyday?) then I'm sure there are also other views maintained by each religion as to how we were created. That includes what I believe in, FSM ftw.

So just because one community is more ridiculous than another we should give them the right to corrupt the youth of their community who have no choice in the matter?


They are both theoritical? Perhaps, yes, but is this arguement really valid? One of the theories has evidence to support it, the other, none. So if all you qualify for something to be taught is that it is a theory, then my new religion that the invisible giant apple pie in the Sahara Desert is god must be taught in schools! Teach all points and views? We could not possibly do that practically. I'm just making a point here, ignore the exact wording if you can, especially in the first one.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Sep 12 2007, 8:13 pm by Dapperdan.

Hard scientific evidence supports the Big Bang theory. Who's to say a god didn't create the Big Bang or evolution? Atheism is as invalid as Theism, so I believe schools should teach neither. Evolution and the Big Bang are independent from anything religious, so it can't be used as an argument to support Atheism.
Those are personal opinion, because creationism doesn't always mean Christianity.
You are proposing that we dictate the classroom to teach Atheism. Also, morals are just opinions, everyone has different morals. It's the same as religion, so you are just proposing that we teach what you think is best for everyone, which contradicts what you said a few sentences ago.
Another possibility is that these have always been around, but now that they have such a negative connotation, we are much more aware of their occurrences, which would actually mean that the education is working.
Atheism is not a valid scientific theory either, and they certainly don't teach agnosticism at school.

I don't believe he is trying to make a statement about atheism at all, especially since it isn't being mentioned. He is only trying to show how creationism is dependent on the existence of a higher being without having any hard scientific evidence as opposed to the big bang and evolution. Therefore creationism isn't scientifically valid. Whether you think atheism is valid or invalid is irrelevant.

I also see you like to use a bunch of red herring and strawman arguments.
For #2 he never stated creationism. When referring to Christianity he always used intelligent design.

Even if he does use them interchangeably then he is establishing this discussion under the assumptions that it is under the view of Christianity's creationism.


Once again I think you're putting words in his mouth and trying to make this all apply to Atheism. He's not dictating that we teach Atheism. He's dictating that we teach neither and keep education secular.

Atheism isn't being taught in schools. Stop drawing it into this discussion. You aren't really countering his point at all.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Sep 12 2007, 3:32 am by devilesk.

I think Creationism should be a optional class that student can individually choose (u know like join a club or team)