Argument Against Creationism

Arguments in Favor of both Creationism and Intelligent Design being taught in public schools The Scopes trial resulted from John Thomas Scopes’ violation of a mandate in Tennessee law that had passed the same year which outlawed the teaching in public schools that humans evolved from another species (Scopes v. Tennessee, 1925). In this case, teaching about evolution in public schools was treated as a crime. An extreme example of argument of creationist against the motives of evolutionists teaching evolution over creationism in school is “The fact that so many major evolutionary writers emphasize the lack of purpose, dependence upon chance, and reliance upon evolution in providential ways, proves the unsuitability of the theory for public

It has no scientific significance (Harding, 1981).” Kitzmiller v. Dover was brought to court because of intelligent design being taught in classrooms alongside traditional science; parents reacted claiming that the district had violated the establishment clause on religion in the first amendment (Kitzmiller v. Dover, 2005). In this case teaching about intelligent design was treated as a crime, as it was seen by the judges as a rewording of creationism to get past the establishment clause of the first amendment (Hudson, 2005). Glenn Branch, director of the National Center for Science Education, states that “Intelligent-design proponents have not contributed any peer-reviewed scientific research literature, which is the gold standard for

But it can be handled more effectively than it has in the past. It is suggested here that both options—creationism and evolution—can be accommodated in the public schools of America, although with restrictions that may not completely satisfy proponents of either viewpoint (Davis, 1999 p.670).” After, observing the arguments for teaching creationism and intelligent design in public schools with evolution, as well as against teaching both in the same setting, the perspective of this paper will present its argument in favor of teaching about creationism and intelligent design with evolution in the public school as well as suggestions for how to approach it. As for the integration of faith and learning, and in light of the first amendment, and for informing citizens, it is best to consider teaching about both creationism and evolution in public schools. “By exposing students to different perspectives, students are better able to choose for themselves what to believe and thus better able to exercise their personal autonomy (Warnick, 2009, p. 305).” Warnick proposes two reasons for including both, or as he calls it, “the principle of curricular fairness (Warnick, 2009, p. 306).” The first reason is to promote autonomy for students by providing them with options and room to make their own choices; the second reason is to allow for familial intimacy (Warnick, 2009, p. 306-307).