What should schools teach?

[MEMNOCK]

In 2000, a People for the American Way poll among Americans found that:

• 29% believe public schools should teach evolution in science class but can discuss creationism there as a belief;
• 20% believe public schools should teach evolution only;
• 17% believe public schools should teach evolution in science class and religious theories elsewhere;
• 16% believe public schools should teach creation only;
• 13% believe public schools should teach both evolution and creationism in science class;
• 4% believe public schools should teach both but are not sure how.

What do you think?

 

[Madhuri]

Evolution is based in science and thus is appropriate for science class. Religion is not based in science, thus it should be taught in religious studies.

 

[MEMNOCK]

It seems like complete common sense doesn't it. Thats what I find shocking about the recent laws in the state of Kansas only allowing creationism to be taught in schools.

 

[Ahanit]

I do not understand why americans really want to discuss Creationism as Science... It is no Science it is a Religion Belief

I for myself have found out that many Myth of creation have parts according to the Scientific view of Evolution. But in the hohle there are still Myths because of the language, the pictures and the knowledge of those who have written them. They want to explain a komplex Idea to people with no or not many education in times where science was not a real interest nor was it far enough to give the answers people searched for.

So THe Myths of creation are part of History and religion but in our times where we have a good basic knowledge and science far away from thinking in colored pictures they have no place in our scientific education.

My Opinion

 

[Smoke]

29% believe public schools should teach evolution in science class but can discuss creationism there as a belief;

I voted for this one. By which I mean that any licensed school, whether public or private, should teach evolution, and may also explain why creationism is nonsense.

 

[T-Dawg]

Creationism is not something that should be mentioned in a decent school. The best way to deal with trolls is to ignore them, the same principle applies here. Bringing up creationism for debate gives it an atmosphere of legitimacy that only strengthens it even if they get crushed in the debate.

 

[Venatoris]

Creationism should be openly mocked at any available opportunity. Any time that word is uttered it should be met with hysterical laughter from all in attendance. If school science classrooms are used to promote this, we might actually be able to stomp out the stupidity altogether.

 

[jarofthoughts]

I voted for this one: "Public schools should teach evolution in science class and religious theories elsewhere" because learning ABOUT religion as such is not a bad thing, but I have an issue with the wording. By calling it "religious theories" one might be led to believe that the religious myths are "Theories" on the same level as Scientific Theories, which is actually a common misunderstanding.

I can't even count the number of times some dude as said "But it's ONLY a theory", revealing an utter and complete lack of understanding of science.

 

[Noaidi]

I voted for "Public schools should teach evolution in science class but can discuss creationism there as a belief".
Creationism is a view held by many, and the only way to debunk it is to present the evidence for evolution alongside it and challenge creationists to refute it.

 

[Tarheeler]

Evolution is based in science and thus is appropriate for science class. Religion is not based in science, thus it should be taught in religious studies.

I agree.

 

[DeitySlayer]

present the evidence for evolution alongside it and challenge creationists to refute it.

But then should the geocentric views of Aristotle be taught in science also, along with the 'four humours' theory of body composition?

 

[ZooGirl02]

In my opinion, public schools should teach evolution in science class. They can discuss the creationism in a class devoted to religion. I personally see nothing wrong with there being a required class in high school which examines all of the world's major religions, especially Judaism, Christianity, and Islam but definitely not excluding Hinduism and Buddhism or other faiths both historical and modern.

 

[Noaidi]

But then should the geocentric views of Aristotle be taught in science also, along with the 'four humours' theory of body composition?

No, those topics shouldn't be taught as such. Rather, they should be discussed as alternative views once held. I feel the same applies to creationism. It shouldn't be taught as a fact or even as a valid alternative to ToE, but it should be discussed, allowing pupils to acknowledge that some people have views that are not evidence-based.

Edit: congrats on your exam passes!

 

[jmvizanko]

I voted "Public schools should teach evolution in science class and religious theories elsewhere"

I have no problem with offering religious classes that mention creationism as a form of religious belief, since it contains no science and only states philosophical propositions (and terrible ones at that). If you take biology, you should be expecting to learn about evolution, as that is the basis of modern biology. If a student has a problem with that, then they should not take biology. Although students making this decision would represent the sad state of affair in this country of a large adherence to antiscience attitudes.

 

[Jeremiah]

In my opinion, public schools should teach evolution in science class. They can discuss the creationism in a class devoted to religion. I personally see nothing wrong with there being a required class in high school which examines all of the world's major religions, especially Judaism, Christianity, and Islam but definitely not excluding Hinduism and Buddhism or other faiths both historical and modern.

"I personally see nothing wrong with there being a required class in high school which examines all of the world's major religions"

Other then the fact it is against the law?

"which examines all of the world's major religions, especially Judaism, Christianity, and Islam but definitely not excluding Hinduism and Buddhism or other faiths both historical and modern."

You would create a favoritism for the "major" religions and exclude the other.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State. -Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT., Jan. 1, 1802

Religion does not belong in public schools, end of story. Schools should not teach any religion, no matter how "major" it is, nor should they teach against any "religious theories". The separation of church and state is what protects our freedom of religion form mob mentality, and we should strive to persevere this separation.

 

[Jeremiah]

I voted for this one. By which I mean that any licensed school, whether public or private, should teach evolution, and may also explain why creationism is nonsense.

"and may also explain why creationism is nonsense."

Schools should not be wasting their time and our tax dollars on nonsense.

 

[PolyHedral]

You would create a favoritism for the "major" religions and exclude the other.

Which, AFAIK, has nothing to do with establishing a new religion or exercising them.

 

[Jeremiah]

I voted for "Public schools should teach evolution in science class but can discuss creationism there as a belief".
Creationism is a view held by many, and the only way to debunk it is to present the evidence for evolution alongside it and challenge creationists to refute it.

You can not use public schools to "debunk" a religious belief. That is against our laws.

If they want to believe the world was created 6000 years ago, then that is their right. We have no right at all to use public schools to try and "debunk" that belief.

 

[AxisMundi]

In 2000, a People for the American Way poll among Americans found that:

• 29% believe public schools should teach evolution in science class but can discuss creationism there as a belief;
• 20% believe public schools should teach evolution only;
• 17% believe public schools should teach evolution in science class and religious theories elsewhere;
• 16% believe public schools should teach creation only;
• 13% believe public schools should teach both evolution and creationism in science class;
• 4% believe public schools should teach both but are not sure how.

What do you think?

It is my firmest opinion that science belongs in public schools, and religion belongs in religious institutions (and at home, of course).

 

[AxisMundi]

I voted for "Public schools should teach evolution in science class but can discuss creationism there as a belief".
Creationism is a view held by many, and the only way to debunk it is to present the evidence for evolution alongside it and challenge creationists to refute it.

I would agree, if said public school was at the college level.

Younger chidlren are simply too impressionable, and the images of Creationism too strong. Something organized religion has counted on for millenia.