Current Events > Okay, one more try. Why shouldn't creationism be taught in public schools?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Serious answers. I am doing a joined project on this subject and the more information, the better.

Are you for it or against it, and why?

I got a good bit of data last time. A bit more would be fantastic.
---

Because creationism has not been proven to be correct.

No evidence, at all, and if we choose to teach creationism from a Christian standpoint we should include other alternative views from other religions.
---

What's there to teach? Like, it would just be reading the bible.
---

Because then there wouldn't be enough time for critical feminist theory and intersectionality.

FLUFFYGERM posted...

Because then there wouldn't be enough time for critical feminist theory and intersectionality.

you seem so bitter lately claddy, what's goin' on man?
---

SlakingOnDuty posted...

Because creationism has not been proven to be correct.

Neither has evolution or the big bang, yet here we are.
---

MC_BatCommander posted...

What's there to teach? Like, it would just be reading the bible.

Pretty much. I don't particularly care if it is taught or not but what exactly would they say about it. It's not like they can go into any scientific details the way you can with evolution

SageHarpuia posted...

SlakingOnDuty posted...

Because creationism has not been proven to be correct.

Neither has evolution or the big bang, yet here we are.

They shouldn't teach those things either.

I don't really know how'd you teach it unless you're tackling it from an anthropological angle and going through the various creation myths from different cultures.

Wait a minute... I know that username from somewhere
---

Sayoria posted...

Serious answers. I am doing a joined project on this subject and the more information, the better.

Are you for it or against it, and why?

I got a good bit of data last time. A bit more would be fantastic.

I don't care if you teach creationism in school, but teach it in Theology classes, not science classes.
---

I'm all for teaching children about mythology, as long as it's taught as such.
---

So long as it's taught as part of a world creation mythology subject umbrella'd under literature/history/sociology I don't really see any problem with it aside from the opportunity cost of not learning about a different subject that may be more useful or interesting.

However it has no business being taught as science, or in any parallel manner when discussing evolutionary matters such as genetic mutation, sexual reproduction, or natural selection. Because it's literally not science.
---

It isn't science.
---

ChromaticAngel posted...

Sayoria posted...

Serious answers. I am doing a joined project on this subject and the more information, the better.

Are you for it or against it, and why?

I got a good bit of data last time. A bit more would be fantastic.

I don't care if you teach creationism in school, but teach it in Theology classes, not science classes.

Why? Science suggests intelligent design, and since other sound theories are taught I see no reason why this should be excluded.
---

SageHarpuia posted...

SlakingOnDuty posted...

Because creationism has not been proven to be correct.

Neither has evolution or the big bang, yet here we are.

Both of those things have WAY more sporting evidence than the creation myth

Which isn't saying much, since there is no evidence for the creation myth
---

However it has no business being taught as science, or in any parallel manner when discussing evolutionary matters such as genetic mutation, sexual reproduction, or natural selection. Because it's literally not science.

Evolution is literally not possible, so I don't see your point.
---

SageHarpuia posted...

Science suggests intelligent design

No it doesn't.
---

SageHarpuia posted...

Why? Science suggests intelligent design, and since other sound theories are taught I see no reason why this should be excluded.

The only "intelligent design" suggested by science is the designs done by intelligent men. For example: Almonds and Bananas.
---

SageHarpuia posted...

However it has no business being taught as science, or in any parallel manner when discussing evolutionary matters such as genetic mutation, sexual reproduction, or natural selection. Because it's literally not science.

Evolution is literally not possible, so I don't see your point.

Are you fucking with us
---

__aCEr__ posted...

I don't really know how'd you teach it unless you're tackling it from an anthropological angle and going through the various creation myths from different cultures.

philsov posted...

So long as it's taught as part of a world creation mythology subject umbrella'd under literature/history/sociology I don't really see any problem with it aside from the opportunity cost of not learning about a different subject that may be more useful or interesting.

However it has no business being taught as science, or in any parallel manner when discussing evolutionary matters such as genetic mutation, sexual reproduction, or natural selection. Because it's literally not science.

---

Mal_Fet posted...

SageHarpuia posted...

SlakingOnDuty posted...

Because creationism has not been proven to be correct.

Neither has evolution or the big bang, yet here we are.

Both of those things have WAY more sporting evidence than the creation myth

Which isn't saying much, since there is no evidence for the creation myth

Sorry fam, but it's the other way around.
---

Is it simply being taught from an informative perspective? If it's a religious studies class (exploring faiths as concepts, opinions, impacts, etc.) then that'd be fine. In fact I'd support it as long as it dealt with many different faiths. Regardless of how false they are, religions have a huge influence in the world, and teaching that could make people more aware.

If religion is being promoted as truth, then that kinda violates the whole government-not-establishing-religion thingy in the USA. It's a PUBLIC school.
---

SageHarpuia posted...

However it has no business being taught as science, or in any parallel manner when discussing evolutionary matters such as genetic mutation, sexual reproduction, or natural selection. Because it's literally not science.

Evolution is literally not possible, so I don't see your point.

---

I think I remember being taught it in school, but more in the form of saying it's not really a legit thing. Just letting students know about the more bogus theories out there.

SageHarpuia posted...

However it has no business being taught as science, or in any parallel manner when discussing evolutionary matters such as genetic mutation, sexual reproduction, or natural selection. Because it's literally not science.

Evolution is literally not possible, so I don't see your point.

Lmao

1. Separation of church and state. There are hundreds of creation myths and a class couldn't possibly teach all of them. Therefore, the government, through its public school education, will be sponsoring one or a few religions over another. It's unconstitutional.

2. No evidence. School is supposed to be a place where you teach kids facts and critical thinking. Creationism relies on faith and offers no real evidence to back up its claims. Thus, it has no place in an institution designed for learning.
---

SageHarpuia posted...

However it has no business being taught as science, or in any parallel manner when discussing evolutionary matters such as genetic mutation, sexual reproduction, or natural selection. Because it's literally not science.

Evolution is literally not possible, so I don't see your point.

It's very improbable but it's possible.

religion has no place in public schools
---

DragonGirlYuki posted...

It isn't science.

---

_Near_ posted...

2. No evidence. School is supposed to be a place where you teach kids facts and critical thinking. Creationism relies on faith and offers no real evidence to back up its claims. Thus, it has no place in an institution designed for learning.

The first argument you made was the correct one. This one is not, simply because public schools are known to not always teach opinions and critical thinking.

It falls into personal beliefs, and the country is so much more diverse in beliefs and culture now. It would be smarter to leave those in college courses and religious communities, rather than force them into required courses when there's already important courses missing for many schools.
---

Giant_Aspirin posted...

religion has no place in public schools

just like facts have no place in organized religion

https://static.comicvine.com/uploads/square_medium/11/114183/5154912-gary_chalmers.png
---

FLUFFYGERM posted...

This one is not, simply because public schools are known to not always teach opinions and critical thinking.

It doesn't matter what public schools are known for. It matters what public schools should be.
---

Some personal experience. I went to a Christian High school, and here's what we were taught.

Various dating methods (carbon dating) are not accurate beyond a certain threshold, so evolution as we understand it may not have the timetable the accepted theory grants it.

Various examples that "disprove" the assumtion that rock strata are absolutely useful, such as trees found buried vertically through multiple levels.

That Noah's Flood effed up everything and thats why things are buried so deep and those strata cant necessarily be trusted.

That there was a firmament of water surrounding earth in prehistory. Iirc its mentioned in Genesis, and in high school they taught it as like, a massive, literal bubble of water. This supposedly created the conditions that allowed fpr prehistoric life. When the flood happened, the firmament was gone, and the massive change in climate killed the dinosaurs. (Also this is used to explain how Adam etc lived so long)

...

Now if there is any actual evidence for any of this I'd support it being taught, but as far as I know none of these things have any serious scientific investigation behind them, and is mostly armchair speculation. (And things like vertical trees were local phenomenons with specific causes, like collapsed coal mines or something).

And while I was in school these theories were never really explored in depth anyway, but mainly used to discredit evolution as an explanation for how life began.

In summation, I'd be for creationism if there was any serious body of creation science theories with which to teach. I am currently skeptical of it because from personal experience, "creation science" is mainly a tool to discredit mainstream evolutionary theory, not something that is studied to stand on its own.
---

FLUFFYGERM posted...

Because then there wouldn't be enough time for critical feminist theory and intersectionality.

---

chill02 posted...

https://static.comicvine.com/uploads/square_medium/11/114183/5154912-gary_chalmers.png

mfw Superintendent Chalmers has a first name
---

Which version of creationism should be taught? hindiusm? Hawaiian?

It's a religion

Why would you teach just one religion, out of all possible religions in the world?

Why would you teach any religion in public school in the first place?

Public school, a place where children may come from different religious families, is not a place to teach them one singular religion, if any at all.
---

__aCEr__ posted...

I don't really know how'd you teach it unless you're tackling it from an anthropological angle and going through the various creation myths from different cultures.

I actually like that idea. No sense in limiting to one culture when everything else we teach has roots all over the globe. Why would this be any different?

AlisLandale posted...

I am currently skeptical of it because from personal experience, "creation science" is mainly a tool to discredit mainstream evolutionary theory, not something that is studied to stand on its own.

Correct.
---

Blue_Dream87 posted...

if we choose to teach creationism from a Christian standpoint we should include other alternative views from other religions.

This is my only gripe with it. My world history class in high school touched heavily on creationism per Christianity but didn't touch on anything else beyond "this idea varies by culture and location." If you want to include a lesson that is an impartial and inclusive although brief part of the curriculum, knock yourself out imo. Just don't shoehorn Sunday school into the public science classroom.
---

Because it's asinine and blatantly not true.
---

It shouldn't be taught as fact, but it should be addressed and discussed. It's a popular hypothesis with merit, just as the big bang theory is a popular hypothesis with merit.

Woooooooooow, 45 posts. This blew up fast. Seriously wrote one page. Will be looking this over. Thanks for the responses again guys.
---