Fact v. Faith in public schools
Editorial
Issue date: 3/31/05 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 2 next >
Subject matter outside of philosophical thought in public schools should be limited to what either stimulates critical intelligent thinking or reinforces proven theories and relevant hypotheses.
Nine states have recently proposed legislation that could hinder science learning by introducing a form of religious teaching in public schools, strategically referred to as "intelligent-design theory," or IDT. The theory - a term very loosely used when discussing such matters of creationism - is based on the opinion that life might be too complex to evolve naturally, thus requiring a supreme creator.
In contrast, scientists present solid theories of evolution, claiming to have many answers for what creationists have deemed not provable or inaccurate.
Both sides have seemingly well-intentioned motives, but one argument has a clear disadvantage regarding relevance in a public education system.
The idea of teaching IDT in public schools undermines numerous noble attempts to separate church and state and stirs controversy regarding theories of evolution, which have clear and plentiful evidence.
While one should respect all ideas and concepts regarding the origin of life, IDT in public schools clearly violates walls created to prevent the establishment of any one religion. Opening school doors to IDT would set a precedent of allowing any idea to be presented as regular public curriculum, regardless of its lacking in scientific support or educational relevance.
Historically, religion has surfaced publicly and has worked its way into everyday governance. Unfortunately, one set of beliefs stands above the others, and religious minorities in the United States, as a result, have been the subject of mockery and hatred.
Traditionally, Christianity has been the most predominant religion to influence American culture, and slip-ups have resulted in Christian ideas remaining in public and governmental forums. For example, God likely will remain on U.S. currency, and the battle for removing a supreme creator from the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance likely has a future of heated debate.
Nine states have recently proposed legislation that could hinder science learning by introducing a form of religious teaching in public schools, strategically referred to as "intelligent-design theory," or IDT. The theory - a term very loosely used when discussing such matters of creationism - is based on the opinion that life might be too complex to evolve naturally, thus requiring a supreme creator.
In contrast, scientists present solid theories of evolution, claiming to have many answers for what creationists have deemed not provable or inaccurate.
Both sides have seemingly well-intentioned motives, but one argument has a clear disadvantage regarding relevance in a public education system.
The idea of teaching IDT in public schools undermines numerous noble attempts to separate church and state and stirs controversy regarding theories of evolution, which have clear and plentiful evidence.
While one should respect all ideas and concepts regarding the origin of life, IDT in public schools clearly violates walls created to prevent the establishment of any one religion. Opening school doors to IDT would set a precedent of allowing any idea to be presented as regular public curriculum, regardless of its lacking in scientific support or educational relevance.
Historically, religion has surfaced publicly and has worked its way into everyday governance. Unfortunately, one set of beliefs stands above the others, and religious minorities in the United States, as a result, have been the subject of mockery and hatred.
Traditionally, Christianity has been the most predominant religion to influence American culture, and slip-ups have resulted in Christian ideas remaining in public and governmental forums. For example, God likely will remain on U.S. currency, and the battle for removing a supreme creator from the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance likely has a future of heated debate.
