Creationism in Public Schools

[Jolthig]

I've changed my mind, I think creationism should be taught, as a side project as to how to effectively debunk junk science.

It would only be a waste of time lol

[The Alma Mater]

Ah, so you have absolutely no idea what science is, good to know. I'll give you a hint: it isn't a list of facts. Claiming unfalsifiable beliefs to be true is an outright direct denial of science.

Ah, so religion is stupid. Okay.

Creationism is not religion - it is a con that abuses religion.
A dangerous con at that - creationists are largely responsible for the increase in antibiotic resistant strains of diseases. They are literally endangering the life of humanity; without any hyperbole.

[Galloism]

A dangerous con at that - creationists are largely responsible for the increase in antibiotic resistant strains of diseases.

Ok, I’m curious - what evidence brought you to this conclusion?

[Europa Undivided]

Ah, so religion is stupid. Okay.

Creationism is not religion - it is a con that abuses religion.
A dangerous con at that - creationists are largely responsible for the increase in antibiotic resistant strains of diseases. They are literally endangering the life of humanity; without any hyperbole.

No. It is due to people stupidly using antibiotics for less and less erious stuff.

[The Alma Mater]

Creationism is not religion - it is a con that abuses religion.
A dangerous con at that - creationists are largely responsible for the increase in antibiotic resistant strains of diseases. They are literally endangering the life of humanity; without any hyperbole.

No. It is due to people stupidly using antibiotics for less and less erious stuff.

Which according to creationists is perfectly fine to do. After all, neither natural selection that causes the resistance nor evolution that allows diseases to mutate so that they do not only infect cattle but also humans, exist according to them.

[Kowani]

No. It is due to people stupidly using antibiotics for less and less erious stuff.

Which according to creationists is perfectly fine to do. After all, neither natural selection that causes the resistance nor evolution that allows diseases to mutate so that they do not only infect cattle but also humans, exist according to them.

I have yet to see anyone advance this argument.

[Europa Undivided]

No. It is due to people stupidly using antibiotics for less and less erious stuff.

Which according to creationists is perfectly fine to do. After all, neither natural selection that causes the resistance nor evolution that allows diseases to mutate so that they do not only infect cattle but also humans, exist according to them.

Depends on which creationist.

[Geneviev]

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.

Then teach about religions in a theology class, creation isn't science so it doesn't belong in a science class.

That would be a good compromise, if the government would regulate the curriculum for that class.

I've changed my mind, I think creationism should be taught, as a side project as to how to effectively debunk junk science.

As long as flat earth and climate change denial are included too.

[Bombadil]

Then teach about religions in a theology class, creation isn't science so it doesn't belong in a science class.

That would be a good compromise, if the government would regulate the curriculum for that class.

I've changed my mind, I think creationism should be taught, as a side project as to how to effectively debunk junk science.

As long as flat earth and climate change denial are included too.

We don't want to expose young students to that much stupid.

[The Alma Mater]

Which according to creationists is perfectly fine to do. After all, neither natural selection that causes the resistance nor evolution that allows diseases to mutate so that they do not only infect cattle but also humans, exist according to them.

Depends on which creationist.

Creationism is a well defined concept with textbooks and very specific beliefs. Not a random word you can apply to everyone who "believes Genesis might be accurate".

[Geneviev]

That would be a good compromise, if the government would regulate the curriculum for that class.


As long as flat earth and climate change denial are included too.

We don't want to expose young students to that much stupid.

They'll see it eventually. It's better if they already know it's very wrong.

[Nova Cyberia]

Creationism has no factual evidence, so it shouldn't be taught in public schools.

[Risottia]

Ah, so you have absolutely no idea what science is, good to know. I'll give you a hint: it isn't a list of facts. Claiming unfalsifiable beliefs to be true is an outright direct denial of science.

Ah, so religion is stupid. Okay.

If a religion teaches plain falsehoods as literal facts, then it's either stupid in good faith or a deliberate con scheme.
Some religions do, some don't.

[Bluelight-R006]

That would be a good compromise, if the government would regulate the curriculum for that class.


As long as flat earth and climate change denial are included too.

We don't want to expose young students to that much stupid.

You should. If they can’t discern wrong and correct by not teaching them these things, they may even be more stupid and reject the correct ideas. It’s good to compare the good and the bad, and it’s not that much stupid. You’re not digging into the really complex details of these false ideas, like the dome of stars in Flat Earth and why ships disappear over the horizon in a Flat Earth...

[Bluelight-R006]

Creationism has no factual evidence, so it shouldn't be taught in public schools.

Precisely! Evolution has, and like already said, more factual evidence and there are more Scientists in agreement that Evolution is how we are us today.

Although... Creationism can be taught in other subjects, like a class on cultures and religious education and history.

[Kowani]

We don't want to expose young students to that much stupid.

They'll see it eventually. It's better if they already know it's very wrong.

That’s not how it works.

[Saiwania]

Creationism is good, because while the curricula may be silly or absurd; the net result is that it raises the national birth rate for whatever reason. Lots of developed countries have lower birth rates and if creationism were taught instead of liberal clap trap, we could have a new generation of conservatives and nationalists because they wound up being parents while they were young.

We can't rebuild our civilization with someone else's babies. We have to prevent the immigrant groups from becoming majorities, and a large part of it is keeping them out and to keep them from reproducing but boosting our own peoples.

[Geneviev]

They'll see it eventually. It's better if they already know it's very wrong.

That’s not how it works.

How else does it work?

[NeoOasis]

Creationism is good, because while the curricula may be silly or absurd; the net result is that it raises the national birth rate for whatever reason. Lots of developed countries have lower birth rates and if creationism were taught instead of liberal clap trap, we could have a new generation of conservatives and nationalists because they wound up being parents while they were young.

We can't rebuild our civilization with someone else's babies. We have to prevent the immigrant groups from becoming majorities, and a large part of it is keeping them out and to keep them from reproducing but boosting our own peoples.

lol what

Creationism has nothing to do with fucking and childbirth. In fact I'm not sure how anyone with an ounce of reason or sanity could even make a passing connection here. And I'd hardly call a 100+ year old idea "liberal claptrap." Civilization hasn't fallen, America is made up of immigrants, and cutting education isn't going to help anyone with anything.

Just because there are words related to the topic being used hardly means it's about the topic.

[Bluelight-R006]

Creationism is good, because while the curricula may be silly or absurd; the net result is that it raises the national birth rate for whatever reason. Lots of developed countries have lower birth rates and if creationism were taught instead of liberal clap trap, we could have a new generation of conservatives and nationalists because they wound up being parents while they were young.

We can't rebuild our civilization with someone else's babies. We have to prevent the immigrant groups from becoming majorities, and a large part of it is keeping them out and to keep them from reproducing but boosting our own peoples.

How on Earth does Creationism relate to the ever growing rate of Childbirth? No, just because the trend matches doesn’t mean it’s because of that. I can easily say the more bananas I eat, the more homework I get, and it may be true but it still isn’t a cause of that.

And P.S. If you also think it’s good for the world population to rise, I think not. It’s getting overpopulated. Unless we save up food and our descendants will have enough to eat.

[Geneviev]

Creationism is good, because while the curricula may be silly or absurd; the net result is that it raises the national birth rate for whatever reason. Lots of developed countries have lower birth rates and if creationism were taught instead of liberal clap trap, we could have a new generation of conservatives and nationalists because they wound up being parents while they were young.

We can't rebuild our civilization with someone else's babies. We have to prevent the immigrant groups from becoming majorities, and a large part of it is keeping them out and to keep them from reproducing but boosting our own peoples.

1. Teaching creationism won't raise the birth rate.
2. Keeping immigrants out has nothing at all to do with creationism.

[DACOROMANIA]

Why this a debate? Should schools impose a doctrine? These should teach them both theories. Not a science inquisition. Did you forgot the Spanish Inquisition?
Science still working on new theories, so many things are relatively new.
Oh, I forgot, it's America, you can change it by a law, so doesn't matter. You can legalize or forbid everything you want.

[Bluelight-R006]

Creationism is good, because while the curricula may be silly or absurd; the net result is that it raises the national birth rate for whatever reason. Lots of developed countries have lower birth rates and if creationism were taught instead of liberal clap trap, we could have a new generation of conservatives and nationalists because they wound up being parents while they were young.

We can't rebuild our civilization with someone else's babies. We have to prevent the immigrant groups from becoming majorities, and a large part of it is keeping them out and to keep them from reproducing but boosting our own peoples.

2. Keeping immigrants out has nothing at all to do with creationism.

Exactly. Plus, keep immigrants out is selfish, in a way that they can’t look for other jobs in their country and have to move to the nearest one that has opportunities for them, and the money they spend to travel again won’t likely be enough. Also, why keep them out when they COULD rebuild the civilisation? We want humans to live, not one specific race.

If we took out Creationism from schools, almost nothing will happen to the birthrate, and nothing will happen to the immigration system. Sexual intimacy is independent and does not need the teaching of creationism to turn it on.

I still await the day Creationism be taken out from schools. It isn’t scientific, why is it in science classes‽ Also, It’s about damn time, also to prove it doesn’t change the birthrate.

[NeoOasis]

Why this a debate? Should schools impose a doctrine? These should teach them both theories. Not a science inquisition. Did you forgot the Spanish Inquisition?
Science still working on new theories, so many things are relatively new.
Oh, I forgot, it's America, you can change it by a law, so doesn't matter. You can legalize or forbid everything you want.

Creationism is NOT science. It's theology. If a school wants to teach creationism, it ought to create an appropriate course, not shove an unrelated idea into a subject. The fact schools are forced to teach creationism in a science class is already imposing a doctrine.

Also I'm not sure why people treat creationism like a single monolithic idea. There are dozens if not hundreds of intelligent design myths, theories, and stories. Surely we should give each one equal time and discussion?

[Geneviev]

2. Keeping immigrants out has nothing at all to do with creationism.

Exactly. Plus, keep immigrants out is selfish, in a way that they can’t look for other jobs in their country and have to move to the nearest one that has opportunities for them, and the money they spend to travel again won’t likely be enough. Also, why keep them out when they COULD rebuild the civilisation? We want humans to live, not one specific race.

If we took out Creationism from schools, almost nothing will happen to the birthrate, and nothing will happen to the immigration system. Sexual intimacy is independent and does not need the teaching of creationism to turn it on.

I still await the day Creationism be taken out from schools. It isn’t scientific, why is it in science classes‽ Also, It’s about damn time, also to prove it doesn’t change the birthrate.

Also, creationism can be against Saiwania's ideas too.

If creationism is taken from science classes, would you support teaching it as part of history or religion?