Creationism in Public Schools

[The Black Forrest]

Yes, but we should allow the teachers to teach intelligent design as well. By only restricting them to one theory, we are not allowing the students to get all the answers they want.

I completely agree with this, but all theories should be taught. Not just intelligent design, but creation too.

Nobody says you can't teach those in religious studies.

[The Alma Mater]

Yes, but we should allow the teachers to teach intelligent design as well. By only restricting them to one theory, we are not allowing the students to get all the answers they want.

I completely agree with this, but all theories should be taught. Not just intelligent design, but creation too.

Including the theory that humanity arose from the armpits of Ymir ?

[Page]

Yes, but we should allow the teachers to teach intelligent design as well. By only restricting them to one theory, we are not allowing the students to get all the answers they want.

I completely agree with this, but all theories should be taught. Not just intelligent design, but creation too.

Gravity is a theory. Evolution is a theory. Creationism is not a theory, it is a primitive myth that some people inexplicably still take seriously.

[Tekania]

What about last tuesdayism? The theory that the entirety of the universe was created ex nihlo last Tuesday with all apparent age including any memories you may think you have from before that point?

[Hammer Britannia]

Yes, but we should allow the teachers to teach intelligent design as well. By only restricting them to one theory, we are not allowing the students to get all the answers they want.

I completely agree with this, but all theories should be taught. Not just intelligent design, but creation too.

Creationism is not a scientific theory. It is not like gravity where thousands of people poured in peer-reviewed research to try and find an answer, it's more like "Bible Good" and there's your proof

[New Legland]

If students have questions about evolution, then they should address them to their biology teacher. More likely than not, the teacher will have the answer and the student will learn something valuable.

Yes, but we should allow the teachers to teach intelligent design as well. By only restricting them to one theory, we are not allowing the students to get all the answers they want.

So we should also teach the flat earth, anti-vaxx rhetoric, holocaust denial, etc?

[Rastrian]

We need to stop pretending that there's a debate in science between creationism and evolution. There isn't. Evolution has oodles of evidence, creationism has zip.

[The Free Joy State]

Yes, but we should allow the teachers to teach intelligent design as well. By only restricting them to one theory, we are not allowing the students to get all the answers they want.

Creationism isn't a theory. It can't even be called a hypothesis, as there's no way to test it.

And what "answers" would students even get from it other than "because God"?

Funny you should ask.

[Necroghastia]

Creationism isn't a theory. It can't even be called a hypothesis, as there's no way to test it.

And what "answers" would students even get from it other than "because God"?

Funny you should ask.

Ugh. I had forgotten about that... thing.

[Neanderthaland]

Yes it is.

In your opinion.

Given that you don't seem to understand what a theory is, I'd say his opinion is better.

[Tabor-Zion]

Include the actual position that Creationists take. That origins should only be taught in philosophy or religious classes because that's what origins science is, both Creationism and Evolutionism are untestable, unrepeatable, unobservable hypothesizes where evidence must be looked at through a presuppositional worldview.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Creationism isn't a theory. It can't even be called a hypothesis, as there's no way to test it.

And what "answers" would students even get from it other than "because God"?

Funny you should ask.

Ah... good old nonsense packaged in agitation propaganda directed at children.
I am almost tempted to use the worn out canard of "Think of the kids!"

[Ecradia]

That’s like getting approval from Richard Spencer about your paper on genetics.

This. Can I sig this?

[The Free Joy State]

Funny you should ask.

Ah... good old nonsense packaged in agitation propaganda directed at children.
I am almost tempted to use the worn out canard of "Think of the kids!"

People inflicting that kind of bull on impressionable minds seems to call for it, doesn't it?

[New Legland]

Include the actual position that Creationists take. That origins should only be taught in philosophy or religious classes because that's what origins science is, both Creationism and Evolutionism are untestable, unrepeatable, unobservable hypothesizes where evidence must be looked at through a presuppositional worldview.

So history shouldn't be taught because it's untestable, unrepeatable, and unobservable? Those words don't mean what you want them to mean.

[Necroghastia]

Include the actual position that Creationists take. That origins should only be taught in philosophy or religious classes because that's what origins science is, both Creationism and Evolutionism are untestable, unrepeatable, unobservable hypothesizes where evidence must be looked at through a presuppositional worldview.

So history shouldn't be taught because it's untestable, unrepeatable, and unobservable? Those words don't mean what you want them to mean.

I mean, history at least leaves evidence for what happened, in many cases.

[New Legland]

So history shouldn't be taught because it's untestable, unrepeatable, and unobservable? Those words don't mean what you want them to mean.

I mean, history at least leaves evidence for what happened, in many cases.

So does evolution.

[New Lindale]

The US Supreme Court has not allowed creation science to be taught in public schools since 1968, when it invalidated an Arkansas law that didn't allow evolution to be taught in schools (Epperson v. Arkansas). The Supreme Court continued to encourage evolution instead of creation science in Edwards v. Aguillard, in which it held teaching of creation science along with evolution to be unconstitutional. However, many scientists believe that there is more scientific evidence for creation.

Christian groups have attempted to bring creation science back into public schools since it was banned. South Carolina's House Bill 3826, while unsuccessful, proposed teaching creation science in schools. However, none of these attempts have been successful.

What do you think, NSG? Should public schools be allowed to teach creation science? Should they teach evolution and creation science? Or is creation science unconstitutional?

I think creation and evolution should both be taught equally so students in public schools can choose for themselves what they believe. Although it would be unconstitutional if only the Christian perspective is taught, other religions could also be taught.

I aggree with this gentlemen. If we are going to teach the science of evolution, why not teach the science of creationism? It will offer the balance which is lacking in a majority of society, and that is the presentation of both sides of a discussion without distortion or strawmen.

[Rastrian]

If we are going to teach the science of evolution, why not teach the science of creationism?

Not a thing.

It will offer the balance which is lacking in a majority of society, and that is the presentation of both sides of a discussion without distortion or strawmen.

Balance?
Yes, I too want to be taught a balance of truth and lies, that'll make me a more rounded person.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

The US Supreme Court has not allowed creation science to be taught in public schools since 1968, when it invalidated an Arkansas law that didn't allow evolution to be taught in schools (Epperson v. Arkansas). The Supreme Court continued to encourage evolution instead of creation science in Edwards v. Aguillard, in which it held teaching of creation science along with evolution to be unconstitutional. However, many scientists believe that there is more scientific evidence for creation.

Christian groups have attempted to bring creation science back into public schools since it was banned. South Carolina's House Bill 3826, while unsuccessful, proposed teaching creation science in schools. However, none of these attempts have been successful.

What do you think, NSG? Should public schools be allowed to teach creation science? Should they teach evolution and creation science? Or is creation science unconstitutional?

I think creation and evolution should both be taught equally so students in public schools can choose for themselves what they believe. Although it would be unconstitutional if only the Christian perspective is taught, other religions could also be taught.

I aggree with this gentlemen. If we are going to teach the science of evolution, why not teach the science of creationism? It will offer the balance which is lacking in a majority of society, and that is the presentation of both sides of a discussion without distortion or strawmen.

What science? What predicative capabilities does the dogma of YHWH-powered creationism have? What else does this dogma do other than to distort and obfuscate reality?

[The Free Joy State]

The US Supreme Court has not allowed creation science to be taught in public schools since 1968, when it invalidated an Arkansas law that didn't allow evolution to be taught in schools (Epperson v. Arkansas). The Supreme Court continued to encourage evolution instead of creation science in Edwards v. Aguillard, in which it held teaching of creation science along with evolution to be unconstitutional. However, many scientists believe that there is more scientific evidence for creation.

Christian groups have attempted to bring creation science back into public schools since it was banned. South Carolina's House Bill 3826, while unsuccessful, proposed teaching creation science in schools. However, none of these attempts have been successful.

What do you think, NSG? Should public schools be allowed to teach creation science? Should they teach evolution and creation science? Or is creation science unconstitutional?

I think creation and evolution should both be taught equally so students in public schools can choose for themselves what they believe. Although it would be unconstitutional if only the Christian perspective is taught, other religions could also be taught.

I aggree with this gentlemen. If we are going to teach the science of evolution, why not teach the science of creationism? It will offer the balance which is lacking in a majority of society, and that is the presentation of both sides of a discussion without distortion or strawmen.

Where are the peer-reviewed scientific journals of creationism?

There are none. There are pseudoscientific religious blogs and Biblical websites masquerading as scientific ones. Creationism has nothing to offer science but supposition, conflations, falsehoods and "God did it".

Putting creationism in a science classroom would be like forcing evangelical churches let Richard Dawkins preach for an hour every Sunday.

[Rastrian]

Putting creationism in a science classroom would be like forcing evangelical churches let Richard Dawkins preach for an hour every Sunday.

...
I could actually get behind that.
In the interests of fairness, though, only if they force creationism into science classrooms.

[The Alma Mater]

The US Supreme Court has not allowed creation science to be taught in public schools since 1968, when it invalidated an Arkansas law that didn't allow evolution to be taught in schools (Epperson v. Arkansas). The Supreme Court continued to encourage evolution instead of creation science in Edwards v. Aguillard, in which it held teaching of creation science along with evolution to be unconstitutional. However, many scientists believe that there is more scientific evidence for creation.

Christian groups have attempted to bring creation science back into public schools since it was banned. South Carolina's House Bill 3826, while unsuccessful, proposed teaching creation science in schools. However, none of these attempts have been successful.

What do you think, NSG? Should public schools be allowed to teach creation science? Should they teach evolution and creation science? Or is creation science unconstitutional?

I think creation and evolution should both be taught equally so students in public schools can choose for themselves what they believe. Although it would be unconstitutional if only the Christian perspective is taught, other religions could also be taught.

I aggree with this gentlemen. If we are going to teach the science of evolution, why not teach the science of creationism? It will offer the balance which is lacking in a majority of society, and that is the presentation of both sides of a discussion without distortion or strawmen.

1. "Both sides" implies that Christianity is the only religion on the planet and that Genesis is the only "alternative" for evolution.
It is not.
So If you want to "teach the controversy" you must also include creationmyths from other religions, not merely the repackaged genesis that ID and creationism propagate. That includes creation by deities accidentally spilling their seed on the earth, humans stepping out of a giants armpit, a god giving himself a blowjob, a wizzard leaving a sandwich at the beginning of time etc.

2. Science works by doing ones utmost best to disprove the validity of hypotheses. Are you certain that you want kids to do their utmost best to disprove God ?

[Kowani]

That’s like getting approval from Richard Spencer about your paper on genetics.

This. Can I sig this?

Go for it!

[Jolthig]

The US Supreme Court has not allowed creation science to be taught in public schools since 1968, when it invalidated an Arkansas law that didn't allow evolution to be taught in schools (Epperson v. Arkansas). The Supreme Court continued to encourage evolution instead of creation science in Edwards v. Aguillard, in which it held teaching of creation science along with evolution to be unconstitutional. However, many scientists believe that there is more scientific evidence for creation.

Christian groups have attempted to bring creation science back into public schools since it was banned. South Carolina's House Bill 3826, while unsuccessful, proposed teaching creation science in schools. However, none of these attempts have been successful.

What do you think, NSG? Should public schools be allowed to teach creation science? Should they teach evolution and creation science? Or is creation science unconstitutional?

I think creation and evolution should both be taught equally so students in public schools can choose for themselves what they believe. Although it would be unconstitutional if only the Christian perspective is taught, other religions could also be taught.

I aggree with this gentlemen. If we are going to teach the science of evolution, why not teach the science of creationism? It will offer the balance which is lacking in a majority of society, and that is the presentation of both sides of a discussion without distortion or strawmen.

Creation science is an oxymoron.