November 7, 1995
Last updated: 1:45 a.m. EST
Religious zealots scare me. The bible says that God created the earth, skies, and man in six days. How long are God's days since he has always been and always will be? God does not present much science in the bible. He does not tell us how or why things work as they do.Why should Darwin's theories be rejected? God said THAT he created the earth. He never explained HOW. God said THAT he created man. Once again, he left the HOW to man's wonderings. Why not present Darwin's theories?
Who has a monopoly on what is "right"? Remember, we have a diverse and multicultural society, whether some people like it or not. Remember, the world is shrinking. The problem with creationism: what is it and how will it be taught? Can it be taught as a proper scientific theory? Will scientific basis and merit be subverted by sociological and theological additions? Evolution, more than any other scientific theory, is subjected to these questions- especially in this society. Hey, if you don't believe in evolution, got out and do some scientific research. Come up with evidence- numbers, theories and hypotheses that can be tested. Futhermore, total denial of evolution will destroy the basis of the science of taxonomy, paleotology, even the very basis of biology. Some basic assumptions of evolution are behind the tenets of the life sciences. Hopefully, the current trend will not reflect history: the Scopes trial, the heliocentric theory of the solar system and Galileo.
I am a Christian, but I do not believe creationism should be taught as fact in public schools, because that can not be done without teaching from the standpoint of one religion. Teaching from a set religion violates the rights of our children to make their own decisions.
Creationism is religion, and religion doesn't belong in schools. If we let one religion into schools, then that will open the door for every other religion. Pretty soon, every school will be a fair ground showcasing hundreds of religions. On the other hand, I agree with one of the Creationists main arguments: Evolution, while far from flawless, is accepted unconditionally in most schools with no regard to other possible creation theories. Why can't we just require that schools tell the truth (ie. evolution answers many questions scientifically, but it still contains some holes)? It may not end the debate, but at least it would teach our kids not to accept everything they hear without question. Teaching them to think, not remember--isn't that what school is supposed to be about?
I am offended by your reference to a creationism "debate". You are not required to legitimize the views of Neo-Nazis in order to practice objective journalism. Nor are you required to legitimize the views of religious cults who deny scientific fact. There is as much evidence to suggest that humans evolved from single-celled organisms as there is to suggest that the Earth is round. Please don't refer to this conflict as a debate.
Creationism is truth to many and another theory to all the rest. Too many people do not want creationsim taught in schools because it is believed by the "right wing Christians". But if you look at creationsim as another theory (its the truth but for the sake of argument let's look at it as a theory) then it should definately be taught. Don't children have the right to know all of the different theories on how humankind came to be without any prejudice from the teacher as to which theory should be believed? We owe it to our children to teach them all of the possibilities and then choose for themselves.
Why should we hide the truth from our children? Our founding fathers started this "...nation under God" and I believe we had better get back to God before it is really too late. In other words, if you don't believe in creation, you don't believe in God. In Jesus name, Amen
Your web site is great! Regarding teaching creationism in schools: NO! NO! NO! Our youngsters already are having a hard time with real science without confusing the issue further by disguising religeon as science and teaching something which has no basis in fact. We need to stop these people now.
Creationism can be taught only if we also teach children to ignore logic and the scientific process, to abandon critical thinking, to check their brains at the schoolhouse door and to believe only what they are told to believe by self-appointed religious dictators. It does have a place in the classroom, however, as an example of what can happen when such thought police gain power, be they ultra-conservative or ultra-liberal.
Comments like Prof. Wilcox's on the likelihood of Creationists prevailing in Fairfax are truly insulting. He seems to imply that only an ignorant, poorly educated person could believe in the Biblical account of creation. This is patently false. There are lots of theories about the intrepretation of the Bible's account of creation, but the uniting factor is that God actively participated in creation. Evolutionists seem to preach that because of natural selection, God was not necessary, and use this to negate His existance. If you eliminated this part of the teaching of evolution, you could probably eliminate a large amount of the criticism of it. Nonetheless, it is still a theory, that ought to be taught as such. Furthermore, alternative theories ought to be presented. Teaching evolution to the exclusion of all other creation theories is as wrong as it was to teach Biblical creation to the exclusion of all others.
I found your coverage slanted by the comments you chose to to include in your story. Evolution and Creation theories are no more than theories. Evolution is treated like a sacred cow which must not be spoken against. The intolerant treatment of evolutionary theories as fact is a disgrace to our scientific community.
To the program directors and all others involved: Thank you for the excellent coverage of Rabin's funeral. It was a very moving, sad and historical cerimony and you made it available for the world to see. All the Jewish people with ties to Israel appreciate and applaud your efforts. Thank you again.
Evolution is only a theory. It should not be taught as fact in our public schools. If the evolutionist theory is taught, then it is only fair that creationism be presented. It takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe in divine creation.
Creation and Evolution are just theories. "Theory" is just a fancy word for "guess". Whenever schools teach a "theory" it inevitably comes off as fact (it will be on the final exam, after all). So what purpose could it serve other than to promote a political agenda. Ancient civilizations taught their children all kinds of bizarre theories, but what good did it do them?
To ask whether candidates are really interested in educating children or pursuing a religious revival in the school is foolish. The assumption that needs to be addressed is whether or not there is in fact a relationship between what you believe and what you are taught. Think about it. Evolution has its "religious" side to it. It is the assumption that all is chance and we are somehow part of it. To pose a false dichotomy such as that which Becky Edminston poses is wrong. You cannot separate what you believe from what you do. It's like peaches and cream, only more blended. What you teach will necessarily arise out of what you believe. Evolutionists, it seems, don't believe much.
This preacher's son knows the difference between a school house and a church. Creationism belongs in Sunday Schools, not Public Schools. I am offended by some group's attempts to increase their name recognition at the expense of community unity. Once again, the Christian Right appears to be neither.
Sure. Creationism should be taught in the school. Other quaint mythogologies are already part of the cirriculum (Greco-Roman pantheism, for example). Further, a number of other "infallible" Christian teachings are already discussed (such as flat world, witches, and that the Sun rotates around the Earth).
I think creationism and any other theory on evolution should be taught in schools. We once thought the earth was the center of the universe until proven wrong. Maybe Darwin was on the right track but not completely correct in his theory. We must remember that a theory is NOT fact. Evolution may be the most likely answer; we just don't know. Even the basic scientific "laws" have to be questioned. If we stop questioning, we stop discovering.
On the "School Board tackles creationism debate" article: (November 5, 1995) As a well-educated professional, I have learned to critically analyze new ideas or methods. I am constantly appalled at the duplicity that I see coming from those who claim to have our children's best interests in mind yet say that any attempt to introduce a SCIENTIFIC alternative to the evolutionary world-view is actually an attempt to hold "revival meetings on school property" (as Becky Edmiston-Lange seemed to imply from her comments). Since when is it unscientific to test a hypothesis? While I do not know any of the "fundamentalists" running for the Fairfax County school board personally, I have never heard of one claiming that they wanted to teach creationism to the exclusion of all other origin theories. I only hear that from evolutionists. If our public schools MUST insist on teaching origin theories (which, by the way, can never be "proven" scientifically), then they better make sure that they show ALL the data, not just that considered favorable to the currently established "scientific" dogma. I believe a two-model approach to origins (both creation and evolution) offers a more honest, comprehensive approach to origins research. Why can't we let both of these models stand up to the evidence by themselves and let our children see which actually fits the data best? I bet you would see some kids really interested in science as a result. I am glad some people are willing to standup and take the heat from those entrenched in the school of thought known as evolution.
Creationism should be taught in biology classes as an example of an ideological agenda that distorts scientific inquiry. This should be a platform to launch a discussion of the ideological biases of science in general, both within the hard and soft sciences. "Creationism" could be taught alongside "The Bell Curve," and other racist tracts, as well as gender biases in medical studies (using all male subjects and taking results from those studies as applicable to all humans), etc. Don't dismiss them by ignoring them. Allow students to learn from their and other scientist's blindesses and biases.
I am very pleased with the movement afoot to represent the beliefs of the community in the public school. I think that "creationism" should be taught to show that there is major scientific disagreement about Darwinism. I have become pleased that my son's school has expanded their world history course to include the history of ancient Israel and the infulences of Christ and his teachings. I beleive that God had his hand in the establishment of this country to allow us to worship him. We need to do as the those who founded this country and protect our right to worship God. These founding fathers wanted to protect us from a State church and did not intend to do away with religion.
Copyright © 1995 Cable News Network, Inc.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
External sites are not endorsed by CNN Interactive.