Should Creationism be taught in classrooms?

[otseng]

Should Creationism be taught in classrooms (as science)?
More specifically, should it be taught in public schools?
If so, how should it be taught as a science?

[An Observer]

Here is another argument for teaching creationism in public schools.

As tax funded organizations, I believe the public should have a say in what gets taught. After all, it is their money. According to Gallop polls, Americans support teaching creationism in schools by a substantial margin.

Hello Otseng, I agree with you up to a point. But believe it or not, a majority of voters cannot just decide to ignore the Constitution - they have to go to the trouble of amending it first. And the teaching of creationism is seen by many to involve church-state separation issues. .....

There is no such thing as "separation of church and state" in the US Constitution.

There is an establishment clause. And there is a free exercise clause.

Government mandated exclusion of creationism is seen by many to involve violation of the free exercise clause.

The only solution that does not violate either the establishment clause or the free exercise clause is a solution that involves vouchers.

[Jose]

There is no such thing as "separation of church and state" in the US Constitution.

There is an establishment clause. And there is a free exercise clause.

Government mandated exclusion of creationism is seen by many to involve violation of the free exercise clause.

The only solution that does not violate either the establishment clause or the free exercise clause is a solution that involves vouchers.

I understand your logic, but the issues are more complex. The establishment clause says we may not establish a State preference of a particular sect of a particular religion. That is: government must not be in the religion business. Ipso facto, separation of church and state. We're all for it, since we wouldn't be happy if the government insisted that we all follow Wicca, or Mormonism, or Scientology, or whatever-it-was-that-convinced-everyone-to-kill-themselves-in-order-to-join-the comet-Kohoutek.

The free exercise clause says, and rightly so, that each of us should be free to exercise our religion as we deem appropriate, whether Wicca, Mormonism, Scientology,...etc. This, too, we applaud. None of us want to be forbidden from what we believe is a very personal and important part of our lives. But, this is as individuals, not in the science classroom of the public schools, which are supported by the taxes of all of us, regardless of religious affiliation.

So, we come up with the judicial interpretation of the law as follows: separation of church and state, no state support for religious activities, and no interference by the state in religious observance by individuals.

Are vouchers a solution? I believe not. Too many communities have too little money to support their public schools. They need money. Vouchers take that money away. I really don't care whether they give that money to Scientology schools or the the Rev. Sun Young Moon (which they will do if they are allowed). I do care that the under-funded schools will become even more underfunded. This week, I am in Arizona, where a recent newspaper article noted that the new "extra-funding-for-schools-initiative" resulted in $145 per student in the schools that are already well-funded, and $7.88 per student for the schools that really need help. This is sick. Vouchers do the same thing--take money away from the poor. If we were to add money to the school funding to create vouchers, we might be OK--except then we'd be giving money, from people's taxes, to religious organizations that they do not accept. Do you want your taxes to go to the Moonies? How about Buddhists? I like Buddhists...but I've heard "Christians" in my town saying very rude, unprintable things about them--even though the Dali Lama visits our town quite often because his brother lives here. Think about what you, personally, want to spend your money on. If it does not include all other religions, including those you hate, then vouchers are not for you. Go with the traditional public school system--but fix it so that it has enough money to do the job we want it to do.

[perfessor]

"Should Creationism be taught (as science) in public schools?"

This question can be debated on two fronts - we can address the scientific merits, and the legalities. It would seem, to me at least, that after 21 pages of posts we have pretty much exhausted the scientific angles. New posters may of course weigh in, but we seem to be talking in circles.

Regarding the legal issues, It seems that AnObserver and Jose have identified two further paths to follow: What does the Constitution say (so we can all put on our black robes and issue an opinion); and What are the moral obligations of government w.r.t. funding of education? And I intentionally use the word 'moral' rather than 'legal', since moral ideas should provide the basis for legal ones.

Now, I'm not a moderator, but it would seem that these could be constructive threads in a different sub-forum.

[otseng]

Now, I'm not a moderator, but it would seem that these could be constructive threads in a different sub-forum.

What does the Constitution say (so we can all put on our black robes and issue an opinion)

I've created a thread to debate this - Politics and the teaching of creationism.

What are the moral obligations of government w.r.t. funding of education?

Feel free to create a thread for further debate on this.

[Yarr the Pirate]

I've been arguing with creationists for years, and as many as I take to town in debates, it seems there are double who come out to argue the same old points that have eben disproven time and time again - moon dust, jesus instead of gluons, hydrologic sorting - the same old stuff.

In short, is debating going to end the creationist skew once and for all? Or do we need to take more drastic steps, march up to the capitol and whatnot?

[YEC]

Why don't you present your best anti-christian/creationist question?
...you know, take me to town?

I mean...if you can.

[Yarr the Pirate]

See, right there - you're refusing to accept facts unless they conform to your preconceived notions

anti-christian/creationist?

Who said I was anti-christian? You did, and then adhered it to me in an ad hominem attack.

My question was what do we do with the creationists like you who hold onto a warped view of reality no matter how many times you get beat over the head with rational thought? Care to answer that question?

If not, and if you would like a debate, let's do that - but you'd better be forewarned:

I'm the meanest evolutionary fellow you'll ever meet in the debating ring. I wont let you get away with diverting the subject and I'll pound you with truth until you crack. I haven't lost a single debate yet, and if you end up looking like a damn fool, I won't shed a tear, and you have nobody to blame but yourself.

Deal?

[YEC]

Yarr,
I just asked you to post your best question...you seem to be running away already...of course first you had to accuse me of some sort of ad-hom attack as a diversion...but still failed to ask your best anti-christian/craetion question.

So come on yarr...take me around the block..ask away..keep your streak going..I'm waiting.

[Yarr the Pirate]

Exactly why I posited the question at the beginning of this thread

You still cling to the idea that I am anti-christian even though I have already pointed out that that generalisation is completely within your own mind.


You have been warned about debating me, but if you want to, get on with it instead of continuing to declare me anti-christian.

You may debate me on any topic you wish as long as you do these three things:

1) Explain in one paragraph what you feel should be taught in a science classroom.

2) After doing this present an argument. Stick to one topic at a time, no Gish galloping.

3) If you call me anti-Christian after having been warned twice to not adhere that label to me, you shall forfeit the debate.

Again, I shall ask if we have a deal. Do you intend to answer my question this time?

[YEC]

Creation science should be taught in school because science supports it.