• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Creationism be given EQUAL TIME?

IMO, "Creationism" is not a scientific discipline and should not be given equal class time although it is the basis of the 3 largest deity based religions with billions of followers and does deserve a brief explanation of it's primary concept.
 
That probably explains it there.

In Sweden we are so overwhelmingly secular, and nobody is really concerned about that issue you are raising.

marduc said:
There is a gigantic concerted effort here in the US to muddy the waters by inserting creationism onto our schools, it would be misused, misapplied, and bastardized and would lead to misinformation in our students. Creationism (or intelligent design or whatever disguise it is under) and attempts to get it into our classrooms are being used as part of a "wedge" strategy to sow doubt regarding science and the scientific method. I can make no claim about how it is in Europe, but here it is almost certainly to be misused.

regardless even if we granted you your holistic approach, why should creation which has contributed jack **** to our understanding of biological processes get equal time to our understanding of evolutionary theory which has contributed immensely to our understanding of biological processes and is the foundation for countless areas of advancement and development?
Click to expand...
 
Peter Grimm said:
That probably explains it there.

In Sweden we are so overwhelmingly secular, and nobody is really concerned about that issue you are raising.
Click to expand...

It also explains the staunch opposition you are finding here to your thread.
 
Peter Grimm said:
Haha I am no Biologist, I'm just recalling what we learned in my high school Biology class many years ago.

I do recall something about lightning hitting a puddle. :) I think that view fell out of favor later on.

But to say that no-one really knows...I agree... why then is it so wrong to have a discussion on the many viewpoints that are out there?
Click to expand...

It's not. It can easily be covered in a philosophy or theology class.
 
Peter Grimm said:
Yes it does. I think too, though, that ignoring the religious faction of society isn't going to make them go away.
Click to expand...

meh, if they have not gone away by now they never will - we are stuck with them.
 
Peter Grimm said:
Yes it does. I think too, though, that ignoring the religious faction of society isn't going to make them go away.
Click to expand...

It's not ignoring religion to not mention religion where it is not appropriate. Religion is mentioned in other classes a bunch, but where it is appropriate, such as history, theology, philosophy etc.
 
Peter Grimm said:
Haha I am no Biologist, I'm just recalling what we learned in my high school Biology class many years ago.

I do recall something about lightning hitting a puddle. :) I think that view fell out of favor later on.

But to say that no-one really knows...I agree... why then is it so wrong to have a discussion on the many viewpoints that are out there?
Click to expand...

Well we all should be so lucky....
 
Empirica said:
IMO, "Creationism" is not a scientific discipline and should not be given equal class time although it is the basis of the 3 largest deity based religions with billions of followers and does deserve a brief explanation of it's primary concept.
Click to expand...

I think it would actually be interesting to teach the idea of creation myths in general, and different variations from different cultures. Just not in the science classroom.
 
StillBallin75 said:
I think it would actually be interesting to teach the idea of creation myths in general, and different variations from different cultures. Just not in the science classroom.
Click to expand...

I was thought that, in AP Lit, and world history.
 
Ikari said:
There is, IMO, overreaction to religion in public schools. While it is important to ensure that kids are not pressured into prayer or that it's not led in some official function, we've gone to a level where we begin to believe that it shouldn't even be mentioned in the least in public schools. That being said, creationist theories do not belong in the science classroom. Creationism is a theory of theology, not a theory of science. Though overall theology is a perfectly acceptable academic subject as well. It's had too large an impact on human society and moral development to just sweep under the rug. I do think we could have academic study of theology and in that course can bring up creationism.
Click to expand...

Hear, hear.

In California, we teach comparative religions in sixth grade. We discuss Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and many others as well.

I once asked a group of sixth graders, who I knew went to Catechism after school, which of the great religions of the world described their own.

they had no idea.

Apparently, indoctrination doesn't always work anyway.
 
Empirica said:
IMO, "Creationism" is not a scientific discipline and should not be given equal class time although it is the basis of the 3 largest deity based religions with billions of followers and does deserve a brief explanation of it's primary concept.
Click to expand...

You think creationism is the primary concept of Judaism, let alone Christianity?
 
What you should do is encourage critical thinking, not try to indoctrinate anybody. Teach kids a bunch of viewpoints and encourage them to think for themselves and challenge dogma.

Dittohead not! said:
Hear, hear.

In California, we teach comparative religions in sixth grade. We discuss Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and many others as well.

I once asked a group of sixth graders, who I knew went to Catechism after school, which of the great religions of the world described their own.

they had no idea.

Apparently, indoctrination doesn't always work anyway.
Click to expand...
 
Peter Grimm said:
What you should do is encourage critical thinking, not try to indoctrinate anybody. Teach kids a bunch of viewpoints and encourage them to think for themselves and challenge dogma.
Click to expand...

evolution is not a "viewpoint".
 
Peter Grimm said:
What you should do is encourage critical thinking, not try to indoctrinate anybody. Teach kids a bunch of viewpoints and encourage them to think for themselves and challenge dogma.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

I'm not sure that is the goal of the Catechism, however. I could be wrong, though, not being Catholic myself.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Agreed.

I'm not sure that is the goal of the Catechism, however. I could be wrong, though, not being Catholic myself.
Click to expand...

actually, catholics teach that evolution is compatible with catholicism.
 
Kids shouldn't be taught creationism in general.There is no evidence of it. It's BS.
 
whysoserious said:
Isn't it heard in church? Why is that not enough for you? Unless you want to suggest that preachers should start to spend half of their time teaching evolution...
Click to expand...

I suggested that here before, that preachers should give evolution equal time. But the OP doesn't want that. He doesn't want his children hearing that in church.

The thing is he can teach his kids about creation all he wants. But for some reason he wants to force everybody's kids to learn it. And in public schools, of all places, where the audience is captive. That's just not fair to school kids. Schools have to be spared this agenda.
 
Peter Grimm said:
I don't need to prove it wrong. The world is a better place when we can tolerate each other and not just think "I'm right" all the time.
Click to expand...

Your attitue against American Education shows you didn't learn that either.

Just saying - you sound quite opinionated while spout the value of 'tolerance and acceptance'

In regard to religion - by the way - isn't even addressed in school . . . intolerance or tolerance is taught at home - from birth - in church.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Your attitue against American Education shows you didn't learn that either.

Just saying - you sound quite opinionated while spout the value of 'tolerance and acceptance'

In regard to religion - by the way - isn't even addressed in school . . . intolerance or tolerance is taught at home - from birth - in church.
Click to expand...

For all the "you should try to understand and accept opposing view" talk, he seems very unwilling to accept the "view" that creationism is not science and thus should not be taught in the science classroom.

Maybe we should be teaching alternative theories of gravity in PE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom