• Newsletters
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
Tuesday, September 19, 2017
View complete forecast
News-Sentinel.com Your Town. Your Voice.

Creationism should be included in curriculum so students can choose

Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.The Associated Press
Wednesday, November 21, 2012 12:01 am
Effective schooling is imperative for maturing students in that it provides them with the knowledge and skills that will be required in the real world after graduation. Much necessary learning is completed during the adolescent years, but I contend that not enough emphasis is placed on the ability to choose for ourselves what we want to believe. That aptitude could be practiced in science class with the legalization of creationism being included in the listed theories of the earth’s origin.

The evolutionism theory is predominant in the curriculum of many states, despite being unproven, while the idea that an intelligent being designed the universe isn’t even mentioned. Teaching only one set of beliefs is dangerous to science, because the truth could be potentially excluded all together.

Some opponents to the teaching argue that creationism does not follow the scientific method and therefore cannot be taught as science. On the contrary, I feel the idea can be classified as a scientific theory with the hypothesis simply being that there is a creator.

There are, indeed, observations that provide support for the topic, such as evidence of the biblical flood and the fact that the “irreducibly complex” organs in many living creatures could have in no way evolved from nothing. The Bible is used in archeology as a reliable source to locate lost cities based on biblical accounts.

Many other ancient and historical documents back up what is written in the Bible. If it is trusted in archeology, why not for scientific matters?

An argument on Debatepedia stated that “mutations result from degradation of already existing info, not the development of new info, which hasn’t been observed.” Doesn’t the fact that all parts of evolution have yet to be observed and proved, therefore requiring a certain amount of pure belief, make it a matter based on faith, just like creationism?

“Science is only science until it requires or imposes belief. Then it is philosophy.” — Charles Darwin. This mindset might eliminate creationism from the realm of science, but if we wanted to go in that direction, then the indefinite ideas of evolutionism would be debunked as well.

So even Darwin was unsure if his studies were true. Other scientists have admitted that evolution cannot explain everything, and many people would argue that creationism could help fill in a lot of the holes.

Science should not be closed-minded, and evolutionists who are focused on that one select theory could be potentially limiting the scope of discovery.

The Supreme Court ruled in 1987 that teaching creationism violates the separation of church and state. The theory is, however, acceptable in Britain, where some schools even present creationism as fact and evolution as faith.

Also, some people argue that the lack of creationism in education violates freedom of religion by saying that Genesis is wrong.

According to a recent Gallup poll, 46 percent of Americans believe in creationism. That means that almost half of the nation’s citizens are being told they are wrong.

Giving all theories credit in the classroom promotes critical thought, allowing students to carry out the process of developing their own opinion and finding the support to back it up.

“Teach both,” Sarah Palin once said. “You know, don’t be afraid of education. Healthy debate is so important, and it’s so valuable in our schools.”

One online debate said that “not teaching competing theories is comparable to telling students that there is no alien life.” Either all possible beliefs need to be addressed, or the subject of “the beginning” not mentioned at all.

In a country whose foundations are based on the fact that “all men are created equal,” whose motto is “In God We Trust” and whose own pledge states it to be a “nation under God,” couldn’t one declare that the separation of church and state has never been very clearly defined or enforced?

Why should religious rights be any different for students? To be forbidden to learn about a scientific theory for the basic fact that it is related to religion doesn’t seem like freedom to me.

I am in no way arguing that schools should press creationism to be the truth. That would be hypocritical, for that seems to be the method applied to evolutionism as of now.

What I do firmly believe is that it’s degrading to the potential of education to outlaw any form of knowledge, whether it is entirely proven or not.

The theory of creationism being entwined with religion does not at all lessen its scientific value, and it should therefore be available for the enhancement of students’ ability to make their own informed, logical choices.


News-Sentinel.com reserves the right to remove any content appearing on its website. Our policy will be to remove postings that constitute profanity, obscenity, libel, spam, invasion of privacy, impersonation of another, or attacks on racial, ethnic or other groups. For more information, see our user rules page.
comments powered by Disqus