Creationism - teach in schools?

[Andy D]

Creation theory gets boost
By Misha Schubert
Political Correspondent
Canberra
November 18, 2004
The Age - Victoria - Australia

Schools should teach the biblical creation story alongside evolutionary theory, Family First chairman Peter Harris said yesterday.

While his fledgling party - arising out of the Assemblies of God church - had no formal policy on school curriculums, Mr Harris said his personal view was that children should be taught both perspectives.

Asked at the National Press Club in Canberra whether he supported both perspectives being taught, he said: "Of course we'd like to see a balanced approach to education, and... all options and all viewpoints, world viewpoints, should be put forward and people should be entitled to make their own decisions," he said.

Mr Harris said his party had raised $1.2 million in donations for the federal election, but had none from the United States, where the religious right has become a political force.

There was diverse support for Mr Harris' views on teaching creationism alongside evolution.

Australian National University anthropologist Alan Thorne said there was nothing wrong with putting both views to students.

"A balanced view is better than an extreme view in education," he said. "From a scientific perspective, it would be very silly indeed to claim God went around poking fossils into rocks, (but) the two can be quite compatible. There's no reasons why they can't address different aspects of our development."

Labor's federal education spokeswoman Jenny Macklin said: "All young people should have an understanding of a range of religious beliefs."

But acting Australian Education Union Victorian president Ann Taylor warned schools should distinguish between established scientific fact and philosophical or religious belief.

 

[Andy D]

What do you all think about them teaching creationism in Australian schools alongside evolution?

 

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

Goo to man evolution and creation are not observable science even though you can look at the evidence and come to conclusions. Therefore we need to teach several ideas like creation and evolution or teach neither and just stick to teaching what we can observe in science class such as gravity, chemical reactions, mutations and naturation selection (not to the goo to man extent though since we don't observe such a thing taking place).

 

[TwinCrier]

Lets say we don't mention the bible at all. Just explain the facts, present the scientific evidence for a sudden appearance of the universe. Present the evidence for a world wide flood and a young earth. If it happens to corespond with the account in the bible, so be it. If the students want to read the bible's account of creation no one is stopping them. This isn't just a religious belief. When we present it as a religious belief, it can easily be dismissed by those who want to oppress religion in the public arena.

 

[Andy D]

That is true, if it is presented as a religious belief then we are open to having to also present the theories of all other religions considering all the new religious tolerance laws around.

But we need people to stop brainwashing people into believing a theory by having artist's impressions of what a man looked like before scientific research is completed, such as with the recent discovery of the hobit, or pigmy man in Indonesia. The newspaper here which is very anti Christian most of the time anyhow, published artists impressions showing what the man probably looked like and yet they hadnt even done and DNA tests or other research needed in order to know what colour skin and how much hair they had, etc. This is the same as presenting a religious belief....it isnt presenting evidence...

I wonder what is the best method of bringing the Gospel to children then??? That is probably a more important question right?

 

[Thanatosimii]

But we need people to stop brainwashing people into believing a theory by having artist's impressions of what a man looked like before scientific research is completed, such as with the recent discovery of the hobit, or pigmy man in Indonesia. The newspaper here which is very anti Christian most of the time anyhow, published artists impressions showing what the man probably looked like and yet they hadnt even done and DNA tests or other research needed in order to know what colour skin and how much hair they had, etc. This is the same as presenting a religious belief....it isnt presenting evidence...

This is why we shouldn't try to present creationism side by side with evolution. We should try to present creation next to evolution or creationism next to evolutionism

Creationism is religious. If we want to have evolutionists stop teaching their dogma as fact, we shouldn't present religion. That way, materialists can't yell "Unscientific!!!" We should make sure that we only teach, while in secular circles, all those facts that prove that evolution didn't happen, not preach out of genesis. Since evolution is the great fortress of secularism, we should destroy their citadel on their own terms. It will humiliate satan's attempts to remove God even worse still.