Even as a Christian, I could never understand how anyone could reject science and believe creationism should be taught in public schools. I don’t see a conflict between evolution and Scripture. But Sherri Shepherd (who has a shaky grasp on basic history) and Elisabeth Hasselbeck believe that creationism should be taught “as a matter of respect.” They’re kidding, right?
What should be taught in public schools is science. Not religious beliefs.
P.S. I have a crush on Joy Behar.
The Latest on Faith and Doubt
3 responses so far ↓
1 Jumper2 // May 7, 2009 at 8:33 pm
A crush on Joy? That is just sick!
“As a matter of respect” is a silly reason to teach creationism. I don’t think that there would be anything wrong with discussing the basic idea that many evolutionist do not believe in a creator or “intelligent being” and that some scientist (albeit a minority) feels that the study of evolution does. Do these different beliefs have an effect on the science of evolution? Positive, negative, both? All good and fine questions if people are willing to be fair and tolerant. But that is where the problem is, isn’t it!
I think these evolutionists are wrong. They are limiting themselves by trying to place everything in the “science” box. Science and reason is limiting despite the belief of many otherwise! What is beyond the box of science? What is beyond what we can observe?
2 16 chickens and a tambourine // May 7, 2009 at 8:40 pm
I don’t mind creationism being taught in public schools as long at it is part of a curriculum that teaches the creation stories/myths of other religions. Leave evolution to be taught in science class and creationism to be taught in world cultures. It’s good for children to be exposed to opposing viewpoints and see they can be discussed in intelligent and respectful ways.
3 Jumper2 // May 7, 2009 at 9:22 pm
Good point 16! (can I call you 16 for short? Please!
But I also think that it is important to realize what effect our philosophy can have on science, how we interpret what we see, etc. This doesn’t mean one philosophy is bad or good (as far as it’s affect on science that is), but we need to be cognizant of it’s potential influences on what we observe. To say that it has no influence is pretty naive! To prejudge someone on their believes is wrong but to be aware of it’s potential influences and have that be part of the equation just makes sense!
Am I making sense?
You must log in to post a comment.