The main desire is that creation be given the same time as evolution to be presented as a possible theory on the beginnings of this universe. Many people feel that creation sc... ... middle of paper ... ... has become, for all potential purposes, the official state religion promoted in the public schools" (Morris iii). Conclusion This issue may never end up being resolved. States have passed laws pertaining to the teaching of creation, but these laws have ended up being ruled illegal by the federal courts. The real issue may not be if creationism is scientific, or if it is religious.
Many evolutionists view this trend as a serious threat to the advancement of science and have vowed to do everything in their power to stop the teaching of creation in the public school system. Most evolutionists now view creationism as nothing more than a particular version of fundamentalist Christianity with no valid scientific content. One hundred-fifty years ago such a theory for the origin and history of the earth and life would have been termed absurd. Today, however, those who reject the idea of random evolutionary processes being responsible for designing life and shaping the geological features of the earth are termed religious, unscientific fanatics. Today, throughout the industrialized world, the moment children are able to respond to their environment, they are constantly bombarded with the doctrine of evolution.
One might argue that secularism in itself is a kind of religion, but the only way to fairly maintain a separation of church and state is by teaching strictly creationist biology. If creationism is to be taught in biology classrooms, then it must done so carefully, or it can easily be construed as an infringement upon the rights of anyone whose religious beliefs do not align with the Genesis. It would be foolish to ignore reality and deny the existence of both views, so discussion should be encouraged in both private and public settings. There is ultimately no way to please everyone, but following the law closely--separating religion and state--is a step in the right direction.
In the trial, Clarence Darrow argued that teaching creationism in public schools defies the separation of church and state (which is pulled from the first amendment). Darrow moved on to say that evolution does not disobey the first amendment. The trial denied all public schools the right to teach creationism-a belief that humans were created by a higher being-although evolution may be taught. However, Darrow's claim is being challenged. Many believe evolution disobeys the first amendment.
The courts hold the decisions on what is allowed and what is not. When the people of America fight for equal treatment, freedom to teach, or critical thinking, they are shot down in the name of religion. The law doesn’t allow teaching creationism, sitting separation of church and state, but this law is not being defined correctly. Creationism is science, and evolution could be considered a religion. Both creationism and evolution should be taught in schools, because textbooks and teachers are censored and biased when teaching just evolution in the class room.
Another idea is that which is held by those who subscribe to the idea of scientific creationism. Scientific creationism, as it relates to this topic, states that God was the creator, and that evolution is simply a means, developed by Him, of conservation. Due to this definition ... ... middle of paper ... ...plausible alternative. Even if the Book of Genesis happened to find a place in the English curriculum of public schools, or an any other curriculum for that matter, it would still violate the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Even if all these hurdles were overcome, it would still be hotly debated by different religions as to which story of creation to teach.
Does religion influence a person’s code of ethics to the point where it may deter beneficial research and education? The integrity of science being taught in public schools is under serious attack (Peshkin 46). Christianity groups want creationism to be taught along with evolution.This is a problem because creationism, which is currently being disguised as Intelligent Design,is not a science. “Given the wide variety of religious views about creation, there are simply not two sides to be compared and in any case these views are not science and do not belong in a science classroom” (Verma 206). Supporters of creationism in the classroom say since evolution is a flawed theory, it cannot be accepted as “fact.” Instead students should be exposed to other theories, such as creationism, that seek to explain the origins of humankind.
The dilemma boils down to science vs. religion. God has been our creator since beginning of time, but the discoveries of recent science are sudde... ... middle of paper ... ...ive as long as religion. Evolution vs. creationism is in fact science vs. religion, and no theory will ever be unanimously accepted until religion or science is eliminated. Evolution vs. creationism is a controversy that may never be solved. References Steen, Francis.
While the ID movement enjoys wide support from the populace, especially in traditionally conservative areas, it is imperative that the teaching of Intelligent Design is kept out of public school curricula because of the separation that must be maintained between religion and state. The First Amendment to our Constitution states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances" (The Bill of Rights: A Transcription).
In the first day, light and darkness (day and night) were mad... ... middle of paper ... ...do not totally agree with it because the possibilities of an accidental origin are tiny. Although I am considered Catholic, I do not believe in its theory of the creation because science provides explications, contrary to religion, which is based on believing what the bible and the church says. The scientific theories of creationism have a rational explanation step by step not including philosophical part, but the chemical coordination of the formation of the universe and life since its most minimum expression. Religion explains the origin of life in its own way by forcing people to believe in its principles without any discussion, therefore, humans’ logic rejects its impositions and to my point of view, what may be called their fantasies. On the other hand, both theories could be either real or false by the very fact that they are theories and are not ascertained.