Sunday, September 22, 2013
Creationism vs. The Constitution
Sunday, September 22, 2013 by Unknown
Creation science, or creationism, has been a hot button issue around certain areas of the United States for decades. Creationists believe in an alternative theory to the development of evolution – specifically that the Bible gives a literal account of the creation of the universe and all living things. Social conservatives, who believe in this theory of evolution, continually attempt to have this taught in public schools.
A common controversy in Texas is how much of a role it receives within the textbooks that the state condones for use. Every few years, Texas reviews the material within textbooks they use in public schools. Each time this happens the debate about whether to include creationism, among other alternative theories of evolution, comes up. Many scientists, as well as parents, take issue with the idea of creationism being taught in public schools. Their problem, however, is that many of the people appointed to review the textbooks have no background in science, and more than a few believe in creationism. The approved books will be placed in classrooms beginning in the 2014-2015 school year and will not be reviewed again for at least eight years, making people nervous about the lasting impact such information may have.
Should creationism be included in Texas’ instructional materials for kindergarten through twelfth grade as an alternative explanation? Should creationism and other alternative theories even be allowed? These other theories are minority views, so does the Constitution protect them? Mainstream America has decided that the scientific community came up with a fully acceptable and logical explanation of evolution. Social conservatives disagree – they believe that there is not enough evidence to support evolutionary theory and that children should at least be exposed to multiple theories and decide for themselves which they find more appealing.
While there are many good arguments brought up by creationists, such as letting the kids decide for themselves, I am not persuaded. I agree with the Supreme Court’s decision that creationism is a religious principal and therefore cannot be supported in Texas’ public school textbooks. Allowing for creationism to be taught in public schools means giving preference to a religious principal that is in essence based off of western religions. By using the “let children choose” argument, other evolutionary theories would also have to be allowed in textbooks. Who draws the line on what can be considered valid evolutionary theory to be taught? This opens the “slippery slope” argument. As long as the courts maintain the view they have now, complete separation of religion, creationist theory, and law on this matter, no other groups have a claim to put their versions of evolution into the textbooks.
Public schools should continue to teach children Darwinian evolution. If parents wish for their kids to learn alternative theories, they should either enroll them in an afterschool religious program or teach them at home.
What are your opinions on alternative theories of evolution being edited into textbooks? Should kids be taught multiple theories of evolution in public school or would that be supporting a specific religious belief?
Tags:
0 Responses to “Creationism vs. The Constitution”
Post a Comment