No; there are limits to religious freedom when that is contradicted by science
Science cannot limit an American's freedom of religion
Sometimes. Kids should be taught whatever their parents want, but not abused.
I think my religion explains the world and I have no use for science
What I do in my private life is my own business, and I can raise my kids however I like
No opinion or undecided
"If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu
You do not get to pretend that a religious parable is in competition for the truth with an accepted, scientific fact.
Hate crime legislation is an entirely different topic. An very interesting one, but different.
I grant you we all have a right -- even a duty -- to reject or question junk science. And we can look at any new scientific finding with suspicion. For example, I wouldn't bless the Keystone Pipeline if Father Time wrote the feasibility study.
That's very different from rejecting evolution or modern medical care for your children.
First I thought the poll was limited. Next science is not a freedom within the confines of law. It is a search for truth using time honored and tested methods and a rigorous process of proofs. The various disciplines have thier own rigours but share the same methodology. they each have their own vocabulary and terminology.
Unfortunately for centuries the process has been misunderstood by the general public. Observation, reproducability and severe testing are the hallmarks of good science as is objectivity.
There can be no connection between religion or politics in true science. If a theory does not prove out it must be discarded without reservation. And if a theory does prove out it must be able to withstand close inspection and be reproduced several times before it gains any measure of acceptance within the Scientific community. Any person who cannot accept this and continues on is practicimg bad science and sooner or later will be found out.
IMHO the reason so many people have trouble with scientific ideas is that the mental process that we must go through and the language of science is so foriegn most people reject it out of hand or fear it.
"Those who do not learn from history and condemned to relive it".
"There are those who will debate the necessity of wilderness, I will not, either you know it in your bones or you are very very old". Aldo Leopold - Sand County Almanac
True, dat, wolfman. Look at all the people who won't bless euthanasia or who won't agree to donate their organs on their driver's license, because their limited understanding and distrust of science makes them think they're being set up to be murdered.
However, you leave out a very important factor, which Goshin mentioned - scientists are human just like everyone else. They fudge numbers, seek advancement in their fields (sometimes to the exclusion of accuracy), cheat, deceive and downright just get it wrong. The tools of scientific inquiry are sound, the problem is the nut behind the wheel.
If I can't demand you teach Evolution as a THEORY in a science classroom, I don't want you demanding that I teach Sherman's March to the Sea as anything other than a War Crime perpetrated by General Sherman and Abraham Lincoln.
However, history, while fact-based, is not science.
As for your complaints about evolution in science textbooks, you cannot opt out of paying property taxes anymore than you can opt out of paying income taxes, Tigger.
I do not want to give out taxpayer dollars as grants to look for the Holy Grail, etc.