US states consider laws allowing Creationism to be taught by science teachers

[emailking]

How about teaching both viewpoints? Or teaching evolution and atleast mentioning the ideas of creationism?

An example where it might be good to teach both viewpoints could be the "metabolism first" and "genetics first" viewpoints on how life began. This is because there are many scientists on both sides of the issue, and almost all of them would concede the other viewpoint could yet be proven correct. So they're both credible scientific viewpoints.

Creationism is not a credible scientific viewpoint, because there are not a non-trivial number of scientists arguing for it. And the scientists in the consensus see absolutely no merit to this viewpoint. So it meets the threshold of not being worth the students' time discussing it. And mentioning it in a science class is only going to confuse them.

[emailking]

The Catholic Church has long said there's nothing inherently contradicting with its teachings and the scientific theory of evolution.

That may be true. But at the same time, they do strongly imply that evolution is god guided (or at least god assisted), whereas the scientific theory doesn't need that.

[emailking]

To all of you evolution supporters, do you really want this taught in our public schools? Seriously?

Am I supposed to give a critical analysis of a parody?

Obviously not, but it's not what happened either.

[emailking]

^ One could argue that Molecules-to-man evolution is not science then, as no one can reproduce it. Do you really want to use that definition?

Evolution doesn't claim we went from molecules to men. It claims we went from bacteria to men. Most people who believe in evolution would probably also agree that a natural process is responsible for the origin of life, but it's a separate topic. Evolution itself has a mountain of evidence to support it, whereas the science on the origin of life is mostly conjecture at the moment.