The World’s Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!

Creationism In Schools !

In the United States, the determination to keep the creationist flame alive in science classes burns fiercely. Just three months ago, its champions won the right to force Texas schoolbooks to state that evolutionary theory, a stable pillar of modern biology, is still a matter of scientific dispute.
The move was instigated by Don McLeroy, the creationist chairman of the Texas State Board of Education. In March, he argued to the board that textbook authors should be compelled to detail the “strengths and weaknesses” of evolution, allowing creationist discussions in the classroom. His case was crafted with the help of the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based organization that has been instrumental in promoting the creationist concept of “intelligent design”.
The board narrowly rejected McLeroy’s idea but adopted a compromise, calling for students to “analyze and evaluate scientific explanations concerning any data on sudden appearance and stasis” in the fossil record. Both phenomena are viewed by creationists, although not by scientists, as evidence against evolution.
Before the hearing, McLeroy recommended that board members read Sowing Atheism, a book that was written by Robert Bowie Johnson, to rebut the National Academy of Science’s (NAS) anti-creationist stance. Johnson once stated: “Our nation cannot progress morally, spiritually, or politically so long as we permit the NAS to teach our children that they are descended by chance from worms.”
I personally think that teaching creationism in public schools will only further hinder our children and prevent them from learning crucial things, such as science. Creationism is a bunch of foolishness and teaching this will only take more time away from other subjects and take more money from the schools because money will have to be spent for this subject in terms of classroom space, textbooks, and instructors. How do you feel on the subject of creationism and should it be taught in school.

Tags: creationism

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by atheistfightingback on June 7, 2009 at 2:49pm

I completely agree. Religion is for church and if you try to teach religion in school then how do you expect our kids to learn science and compete in world.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mel on June 18, 2009 at 4:45pm

In my second to last year of high school biology, we had one lesson that could be called "teaching the strengths and weaknesses" - I'm in NZ. It was a discussion hour and the teacher played devil's advocate AGAINST evolution and we all had to defend it. Very fond memories of that teacher actually :D

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gecko, Seth...brother of Richie! on June 19, 2009 at 3:08am

Sadly you are not wrong. But the tide is turning.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jo Jerome on June 7, 2009 at 10:01pm

Obviously you're preaching to the choir here (pardon the religious imagery!).

I wonder if the way this needs to be attacked when it comes up at schoolboard and city council and state legislature meetings is:

A) Get people to attack it period. I think too much of the non-Creationist community is irritatingly silent on the issue. There are too many who passively sit by and think, 'no big deal,' or that we're paranoid to think it's a thinly veiled attempt to get Jesus into the classroom. I seriously think that a fair number of the masses can not comprehend that brainwashing would happen by law in this country, so they refuse to acknowledge it when it happens. It's the frog-in-the-boiling-water phenomena. 'Just calling something a theory in a book' is only turning up the temperature on the stove a couple degrees. Who's going to notice?

B) If attacked, perhaps attack the merits of the church-truly-separate-from-state angle. "Why this scientific 'theory' and not, say the 'theory' of gravity?" Filibuster the point, bringing up every accepted scientific theory in the book. "Why evolution and not this issue or that issue (no religious arguments allowed)? Let's change every chapter in every textbook. Too much trouble? Then explain again, why evolution and not gravity? What's that? You aren't a scientist so you don't know how to explain it? Let's bring in a real scientist and see what he/she thinks...."

I'm with you 100% Marquell. The Creationist invasion of our schools is not only insane and nonsensical, but scary, as they continue to be a legitimate force, even in the 21st century.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mel on June 18, 2009 at 4:48pm

"Whats the big deal" indeed. I read a study somewhere (couldn't find it now if you paid me) that said the high school teachers approach to creationism and evolution and how they teach and support them actually have this HUGE effect on kids acceptance or otherwise of it. That lasts well into college education.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David S on June 18, 2009 at 2:12pm

Creationism should be included in the curricula as part of social studies and humanities. NOT under "hard" sciences.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jo Jerome on June 18, 2009 at 8:28pm

Exactly David. That would be my third point of attack: It's a science class. Observable evidence, testing theories, application of new evidence, reproducible/related experiments. Even the thinly veiled "Intelligent Design" version of Creationism is simply not based in science.

"The universe could have been willed into existence by a sentient being."

Fine, but you'd better also be teaching that gravity could be the Flying Spaghetti Monster holding everything down on the ground with his noodly appendages. You'd better be teaching that trees could be aided in their reproduction by the Green Man or tree fairies.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joshua on June 19, 2009 at 2:16am

ergh... *shudder* *gunshot* damn, I missed... never-mind, I best not say my opinion...

-Josh

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joey on June 19, 2009 at 4:02am

Teach the controversy!
I actually own the discworld shirt.

The best refutation of intelligent design or creationism is the fact that they aren't falsifiable.
If it lacks falsifiability, it freaking well isn't science.
I'm not sure why it's so bloody hard for IDiots and creationists to get that through their thick skulls.
Well, besides willful ignorance and stupidity.