R U for creation science being taught at schools rather than evolution?or even both subjects to not B bias!
by 
7seven7
ANSWERS: 13
-
I went to catholic school and we got both. I think it's fine to teach both.
-
"creation science"? is that the new name for intelligent design? it is EXTREMELY bias, and I would like you to point out any other religions besides "christianity" that teaches "Creation Science"
-
I think I'd go with both being taught in school. That way the student has two way different oppositions and can choose to believe either one. They could be exposed to both ways and have the opportunity to choose one. I haven't been taught either one yet.
-
I think it would not hurt to teach both. Not everyone believes evolution is the answer to everything... And they have the right not to be forced to believe it.
-
I'm not for "creation science" at all, stick it in RS where it belongs. It's fair enough to point out the criticisms of the evolution theory in a "of course we can't be sure it happened like this, but the evidence we have suggests..." kind of way; but science lesons should be science, not fiction.
-
"Creation Science" Sounds like the Adam and Eve-ers got themselves a PR firm. It's the bible, no matter how you slice it. Evolution is scientific fact which can and has been proven. Creationism ain't and ain't.
-
I would ONLY be in favor of this proposal if it consisted of two classes: 1) Biology with explicit reference to evolution and why scientists believe it to be a valid theory. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF&pageNumber=1&catID=2 2) Compare and Contrast Creation Myths --- This class would include explanations of the Universe's creation from 10 - 12 different religious traditions. Students would examine physical evidence (or lack thereof...;-D...) supporting each. There would also be discussions about the commonalities and differences between each. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_myths "Creation Science" could be one of the Creation Myths discussed, but with no special status.
-
Most public schools have a problem with teaching things that come out of the Bible, and that's for a good reason: because there's nothing scientific about it. Leave the Bible stories to the private religious schools.
-
sure it should be taught... if you pay to go to private catholic school. Other then that -- nope. YOu can teach the bible as a piece of literature, but as something to base science and fact on, it's just not substanciated.
-
No, absolutely not. Creationism can be studied as part of social studies and/or humanities, but it isn't science. It isn't the result of the scientific method. It is the result of religious and philosophical reasoning and speculation. Anyway, biological science works from a standpoint natural causality. Once you have to hypothesize an extra, untestable, unverifiable factor, you've lost the ability to test while controlling for only one variable. Discovery ends. This issue is really about using public funding to spread Christian ideals to a captive audience. Any family that strongly believes in creationism is more than free to teach it at home, Sunday school, etc. Government funding cannot be used to promote one religion over another.
-
Only reality can be taught at schools and we all know which one is based in reality.
-
Well, creation would have to be a science before it could be taught as one. Creation most certainly is NOT science and those who say it is and use the phrase "creation science" have no clue what science is about. Creation is at best a topic for literature class and more appropriately a topic only for religion classrooms.
-
I would love for creationism to be tought in schools, and kids had the choice whether to study that or evolution.
El Soupy RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC