No. Religious doctrine should not be taught in public schools at all (except perhaps as part of a course on comparative religion), and students certainly shouldn't be misled to believe that it's an equally plausible alternative to ACTUAL science.
Evolution is the scientific view for how life on earth came to exist in its present state, and anyone who doesn't "believe" it is simply wrong about the evidence for it. Period. Our schools should try to produce graduates who can think critically, and that's impossible to do if people intentionally try to prevent them from learning the scientific method.
Last edited by Kandahar; 04-26-12 at 08:37 PM.
Are you coming to bed?
I can't. This is important.
Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD
Most athiests I know are really agnostic athiests and would have no problem with this. They believe there is no god but admit they cannot be certain, though most are pretty adamant against the christian version of god.Based on that, let me ask you a very simple question. I will be honest and warn up-front that if you are an irrational human being, your answer will reveal this fact about you. Now, here is the question:
Does absolute truth exist?
It is a very simply question, and the answer you give will reveal a lot about you. It also just might set you on a course that you had no idea you'd be on today! The beautiful thing about this question is that there is no cunning way around it. It is not a question that can be out witted. There's really no way to dance around the question, either.
You might find that it is one of the most beautiful questions you could ever ask an atheist!
Still ID is not science and should not be taught
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.
It's ridiculous and should be left in Church.
Einstein, "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
Well well well, this thread certainly got the atheist out from under their rocks fast.
I don't think Macro-evolution isnt fully "scientific." It uses historic evidence as part of its premise, as opposed to micro-evolution.
Science class probably isn't a good place to discuss God and theology. Although, I don't think we should ignore learning about world religions and philosophy.
Science is about the uniformity of nature and empirical data. Philosophy and religion are all about challenging that assumption, offering other types of evidences/perspectives. Different paradigms.
Last edited by Clandestine; 04-26-12 at 09:46 PM.