To Creationists: Where does it end?

[Dal M.]

By now I'm sure everyone here has seen the Discovery Institute's "Wedge Strategy," a document which outlines the creationist organization's long-term goals. Turns out that they're pretty ambitious, and desire no less than to remake both science and American culture in their own image - they're just doing it one step at a time.

How about you guys? I know that right now, the consensus among creationists is that ID should be taught in science classes alongside evolution. But surely you won't be satisfied with that, right? If you get your way and slip ID into the science curriculum as an "alternative" to evolution, what are you going to try for next? Booting out the theory of evolution entirely? Pushing for full-on young-Earth creationism?

Please be honest.

 

[nvxplorer]

I’m surprised that most creationists I’ve encountered here are unfamiliar with Wedge.

 

[Dal M.]

Then perhaps they'd like to familiarize themselves with it: http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.html

So, creationists. Let's assume you get your wish and ID is taught in science curricula as a perfectly valid alternative to evolution. Now that you've got your foot in the door, are you going to rest on your laurels - nasty mixed metaphor there - or is getting ID into the classroom just the first step in a larger plan?

 

[PulpitFiction]

Then perhaps they'd like to familiarize themselves with it: http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.html

So, creationists. Let's assume you get your wish and ID is taught in science curricula as a perfectly valid alternative to evolution. Now that you've got your foot in the door, are you going to rest on your laurels - nasty mixed metaphor there - or is getting ID into the classroom just the first step in a larger plan?

I am guessing it is just another drop in the bucket. The bucket being the goal of the religious right to turn the United States into a theocracy.

 

[Carico]

By now I'm sure everyone here has seen the Discovery Institute's "Wedge Strategy," a document which outlines the creationist organization's long-term goals. Turns out that they're pretty ambitious, and desire no less than to remake both science and American culture in their own image - they're just doing it one step at a time.

How about you guys? I know that right now, the consensus among creationists is that ID should be taught in science classes alongside evolution. But surely you won't be satisfied with that, right? If you get your way and slip ID into the science curriculum as an "alternative" to evolution, what are you going to try for next? Booting out the theory of evolution entirely? Pushing for full-on young-Earth creationism?

Please be honest.

If evolution isn't true, then why teach it at all?

 

[f U z ! o N]

If evolution isn't true, then why teach it at all?

but it is true therefore we have to teach it

 

[Electric Sceptic]

If evolution isn't true, then why teach it at all?

But it IS true.

Next?

 

[madarab]

Don't stomp on Carico here. She's actually following the OP.

Carico, what would be interesting to know is how far you'd be wanting to take it. Would you remove public funding from most of the historical sciences? Would you criminalize people who taught or spoke in favor of evolution? Would you want to make war against countries who supported evolution? These are actually honest questions and I'd love to hear an honest response from you. All of these things have at one time or another been done historically.

 

[setzie]

It will never end. Though never say never.

 

[TheBigAl]

If evolution isn't true, then why teach it at all?

If you aren't true, then why listen to you at all?

 

[crazy4Christ007]

Truly, I believe all view points should be taught, not just one or the other. This way one has a better comphrehension of both.

By now I'm sure everyone here has seen the Discovery Institute's "Wedge Strategy," a document which outlines the creationist organization's long-term goals. Turns out that they're pretty ambitious, and desire no less than to remake both science and American culture in their own image - they're just doing it one step at a time.

How about you guys? I know that right now, the consensus among creationists is that ID should be taught in science classes alongside evolution. But surely you won't be satisfied with that, right? If you get your way and slip ID into the science curriculum as an "alternative" to evolution, what are you going to try for next? Booting out the theory of evolution entirely? Pushing for full-on young-Earth creationism?

Please be honest.

 

[PulpitFiction]

Truly, I believe all view points should be taught, not just one or the other. This way one has a better comphrehension of both.

So you think Hinduism should be taught? How about Buddism? African creation myths? Greek, Roman myths? What about intelligent design and flying spaghetti monsterism?

Creationism and evolution are not the only two viewpoints, and teaching all the viewpoints would be impossible. Much better to stick to teaching science in science classes, and religion in theology/philospophy classes.

 

[crazy4Christ007]

All the viewpoints must be taught. Yes, if not then how can one truly 'pick' their beliefs and religion. I come from a private Christan school, yes we never remotely looked at evolution and I was never open to it. After switching school I became open to evolution and found it to be interesting. Therefore I have established myself as a darwin christian. I was able to chose, as many students arn't for they do not fully understand each side. I believe it should all be taught, for we do have that freedom.

So you think Hinduism should be taught? How about Buddism? African creation myths? Greek, Roman myths? What about intelligent design and flying spaghetti monsterism?

Creationism and evolution are not the only two viewpoints, and teaching all the viewpoints would be impossible. Much better to stick to teaching science in science classes, and religion in theology/philospophy classes.

 

[TheBigAl]

All the viewpoints must be taught. Yes, if not then how can one truly 'pick' their beliefs and religion. I come from a private Christan school, yes we never remotely looked at evolution and I was never open to it. After switching school I became open to evolution and found it to be interesting. Therefore I have established myself as a darwin christian. I was able to chose, as many students arn't for they do not fully understand each side. I believe it should all be taught, for we do have that freedom.

I believe that one must look for their picks, when it comes to religion. If all creation myths from all religions are taught, then you will have conflict from all religious sides because they will all demand priority over their own creation myth. Besides, creationism should be taught in religion classes not science classes.

 

[Misguided]

From the sound of that "wedge" thing, it seems that they won't stop until they rule the earth.

It's like an anti-EAC.

 

[crazy4Christ007]

Honestly it just depends on your view point. How you look at religion and science. If you are a creationist, then you will probably argue that creationism needs to be taught in science. Yes then you will have all the other religions wanting to be taught so I understand the dilema. Yet honestly, why couldn't science classes have an overview of what each religion, which I know their are millions, believes to have created? Just a question... I know it would take time, but why not combine religion and science. Yes, I know their will be many responses to this. *sits back and waits for someone to blow up*

I believe that one must look for their picks, when it comes to religion. If all creation myths from all religions are taught, then you will have conflict from all religious sides because they will all demand priority over their own creation myth. Besides, creationism should be taught in religion classes not science classes.

 

[Big Rob]

but why not combine religion and science.

Because they have nothing in common? Why not combine Math an English? Chemistry and Phy Ed? Music and Cooking?

 

[TheBigAl]

Honestly it just depends on your view point. How you look at religion and science. If you are a creationist, then you will probably argue that creationism needs to be taught in science. Yes then you will have all the other religions wanting to be taught so I understand the dilema. Yet honestly, why couldn't science classes have an overview of what each religion, which I know their are millions, believes to have created? Just a question... I know it would take time, but why not combine religion and science. Yes, I know their will be many responses to this. *sits back and waits for someone to blow up*

BOOOOOOMMM!!!
But seriously. Science and religion can go side by side, but only to a certain extent. As you might already know, many discoveries and research conducted by modern science contradict many old beliefs of religious institutions ( example evolution, even though it really doesn’t threaten anything). Many people who take the bible literally, will refuse to be exposed to a subject which can put their faith into question, and thus will cause them to feverously deny or attack this contradicting notion.

 

[kingreaper]

From the sound of that "wedge" thing, it seems that they won't stop until they rule the earth.

It's like an anti-EAC.

Thanks to Logic

 

[Hydra009]

why couldn't science classes have an overview of what each religion, which I know their are millions, believes to have created?

Because it isn't science. What's wrong with having only science taught in a science class? Is biology taught in religion classes? Are the alternative views of homeopathy, holocaust denial, geocentrism, etc taught in medical classes, history, astronomy, etc?