Next time someone talks about teaching creationism in schools...

[Hugabear]

Ask them which version of creationism should be taught.

Should we teach ALL of them? After all, cultures and religions around the world have their own creation myths.

Of course we know they mean ONLY the Genesis version of creationism...

[immoderate]

1. Which Genesis version? I or II?

--imm

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

2. I don't mind if they teach them all as long as it's not in science class

and as long as it's presented as a cultural or philosophical phenomenon and not as fact. In fact, I think it would be fascinating to be a kid and learn about the creation myths of various world cultures and their similarities and differences, the more the better.

[TlalocW]

3. I think something like this happened with the Tulsa Zoo a few years ago

There's a guy who for years has been demanding a creationist exhibit at the zoo to compete against the evolution explanation there, even offering to make it himself. They were going to let him based on there's a Native American quote on the fountain, a state of the elephant god Ganesha (surrounded by other images of elephants) near their section, and something that's supposed to be pre-Colombian around the rain forest animals - all religious symbols according to the thinking so the religious nuts on the city council were going to let him.

But surprisingly, there was a backlash, not only from the zoo people but a lot of the community. A lot of us, myself included, told the council that if the Christian creation story was included then they better be prepared to put in the stories of different cultures. I, myself, claimed to follow ancient Aztec ways and would demand to be allowed to put up a display showing how we came from a combination of corn the gods sprinkling their blood on the ground.

Council changed its mind.

TlalocW

[daeron]

14. Darn you pesky Aztecs you

[upi402]

4. Good idea! Oh and Peter Pan, Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus

WMD in Iraq
Trickle down economics

ad infinitum

[randome]

10. Don't forget the 'truth' that Conservatives care about limited government oversight!

[randome]

5. No. Just kick 'em in the shins!

[mysuzuki2]

6. I am an Anthropologist with a PhD in bio anthro and an ardent evolutionist.

And I think creationism SHOULD be presented in classrooms as a scientific theory. Hear me out guys. Scientific theories need to be evaluated as to their validity. Evidence forand against creationism and evolutionshould be discussed in class and objectively evaluated. Looked at this way, creationism can be shown to be an erroneous theory. This sort of approach would be an excellent way of showing students why we believe in evolution and why it has become the central organizing principle in biological science. It would of course piss off all of the fundies.

[randome]

7. Then they would complain that you're not teaching it RIGHT!

But you raise an interesting point. Teaching both, while at the same time teaching that evidence is all that matters, would make the distinction clear.

[mysuzuki2]

12. The thing that the fundies don't understand about science is that

a theory stands and fals on evidence. Philosophical and theological ideas do not. The overwhelming body of evidence supports evolution. There is NO evidence supporting creation.

[progressoid]

15. There is the problem

Even though there is no evidence, they'll still believe it because they aren't interested in evidence or science. This is just a way for them to preach.

[RagAss]

11. I hear you....but..

How pitiful is it to actually have to apply the scientific method to a frigging fairy tale.
Can you believe we are even having discussions like this in 2012 ?

[coalition_unwilling]

13. The problem with this approach is that 'creationism' (or 'intelligent design') is not

a 'scientific theory,' as I understand the phrase. Is there an experiment that would prove or disprove the existence of a 'creator' (or 'designer')? And doesn't the whole concept of 'science' involve hypothesis, experiment and conclusion?

[TeamPooka]

8. agreed. I always tell religious folks I'd be happy with a religion in charge of our government....

provided they all agree to it being the only one in charge and they all agree it's the "correct" one.
Then they shut up.

[Nine]

9. but they don't talk about "creationism" anymore

They've disguised it as "intelligent design."

And, no, we should not teach it. We can talk about now defunct ideas like "spontaneous generation" as historical interest because no one is pushing that idea anymore. I would worry that any mention of just-as-silly intelligent design would be taken advantage of by some teachers with an agenda or even by some students, who would disrupt the class and waste class time arguing about it.