Should Evolution Be Taught In Schools? - Comments

Nice article. (:

And I think it's perfectly acceptable to be teaching us this. The bible has no right or wrongs but Evolution does. It has been proven, has it not?

There are so many other religions and ideas other than Christianity and Evolution. Such as Buddhism, which respects all religions if they are based on love and compassion. Why can't schools teach that as well?

Yeah, but I'm talking about reality here.

[b]such arrogance.[/b]
And I could turn that around by saying I'm only concerned for your everlasting soul, I'm only trying to help.
You see? Atheists are not justified to shove anything down Christians' throats and neither are Christians down Atheists' throats.


[b]PheonixAngel[/b]
I don't know where in the world you got that, but I can promise thats not the case.

there are more theories in the world than just creationism and evolution, and by doing anything in schools that will violate anything as to peoples beliefs should not occur. I believe that the religious arguments should solely be taught outside of school and that classes in school involving evolution should be OPTIONAL, that way the students can learn what they believe and if they have an issue with the schools options THEY can be the ones to explain it to colleges, rather than making religion a factor in the public school system as well as the admissions process.

I totally agree with the author that BOTH theories, creationism and evolution, should be taught. I'm tired of evolution being forced down my throat, and teaching creationism along with evolution would let people see both sides of the arguement, instead of just one.

In my opinion, evolution is something that has to be learned but no one ever said you had to believe in it. But I am a Christian and I believe that its true! Its still happening today!

Maybe it because Biology is what I love but evolution isn't really a theory. It happens all the time. There's proof.

I really dislike the bible as a lot of what said in it to be acceptable is, in fact is very, very wrong. Even somewhat evil. I couldn't never take it any bit serious because then I would have to be accept all of it, that a man can do whatever he likes (as long as it not with another man) and if a women gets raped, then she the sinner.
I think of these creationism religions and I think of hate and war. It's just another way to judge people.

v But we're just concerned for your knowledge and understanding. We're only trying to help.

I did like your article but it seemed a little unneccassary [gosh, I hate spelling that word...] because it almost attacks the flaws in the other article. Now, I know that's what counter arguments are all about, but it still bothers me. However, I do like most of your article.

However, I still think Creationism should be taught, but in a religion class, not a science class.

[b]xXBreakAwayPunk96Xx[/b]
Yeah, okay, and I'm tired of Atheists shoving evolution down my throat, too.

Oops, sorry, forgot to add this...I thought your article was very good, very well researched, and very well put together. You stayed unbiased, stuck to facts, and delivered your argument very well. :)

I want to argue the comments about most Catholics/Christians not even listening to an argument about evolution. I'm a devote Roman Catholic, and I attend mass every Sunday as well as attend a Catholic high school. However, I believe in evolution, as well as the story of Adam and Eve as told in Genesis. Not all Catholics/Christians are ignorant, nor do we all believe that creationism is the sole reason/way we came to earth. Please do NOT lump us all together.
Secondly, I do agree creationism should not be taught in science, as it doesn't deal with science. It should be taught in a religious study class and a history class. A religious class because it is religious, and a history class because, whether you want to admit it or not, Creationism is a huge part of our history, as it was believed to be true up until Charles Darwin proved it wrong in one of the most controversial scientific debates in our history. [Granted, it shouldn't be taught as the true/only way we came to earth, but rather as a piece of our history].

This was a great article, particularly because you managed to keep it neutral without it being biased to your own personal opinion.

I think one of the main things that I picked up on here, was when you kept mentioning that Christians or those with a belief in a higher being believed that evolution wasn't true. Which is somewhat incorrect since I know a lot of Christians that believe in both of them. It can get frustrating when others assume that all religious people don't believe in evolution.

You also seemed to focus heaps on explaining evolution, which is good since you provided heaps of examples, but I think that you also needed to explain what creationism is. Even if it's just one sentence, it could have really helped balance your article's argument. It also might have been good if you included more on the debate about whether or not it should be taught, because a lot of your article is just explaining what evolution is.

Sorry for the long critisism of this, but I like to comment on controversial articles. XD I really liked this. You included lots of information, examples and a clear explanation of evolution. It was also really well written with a good flow that made it easy to read. Good job.

And i agree with MistressofInsanity. oppsies. i had forgotten to but this part with my last comment. :) sorwy.

Good article. although i think you could have down with less of the natural selection and examples. i do agree that both should be thought as a theory but unfortunely, some people are just to subborn with their personal beliefs and only hear what they wish to hear. i dont know how many countless family/curch members would try and shove the thought that God created us into my head. I listened to what they had to say, thought about it for a long time (i still do) but i'm a strong believer in evolution. most devoted Catholics and Christians wont even bother listening to it.

A very well written article and well researched. It flowed beautifully and was well worded. I love how you didn't get passionate and carried away unlike so many others when on this topic. It bothers me when people just straight up offend others with a complete disregard for their personal beliefs, even if it was not their intention to do so. So well done.

Personally, I think that evolution as a science theory/idea/fact/whatever you want to call it should be taught in schools, in a science class. This is because it is a science idea after all. Creationism however, is not a science idea and should not be taught in a science class but I think it certainly has its place in religious education classes.
A problem in this though is that a lot of public schools don't run religious classes, but that doesn't mean that creationism is any less...accepted (not the word but I'm struggling to find anything else that fits, sorry), it just means there isn't a suitable class for it to be taught in. And there are always other places to learn about creationism if your school doesn't have the resources.

Again, lovely article, but the points of @sunsetwing and @Kurtni Manson are good to take in, definitely :)

I agree wholeheartedly with you godless.

I agree mostly. Though I don't think it should be taught as a theory. It should be taught as a fact. Because it is.

I like, though I felt that your conclusion was slightly lacking. You spend most of the article seemingly talking about/insinuating how creationism is a belief, not an theory, as opposed to evolution which is a theory and then you called creationism a theory? That was a bit confusing for me.
Aha, and not to pick at this statistic anymore, but....
[i]In 1999, Fox News asked “what is the more likely explanation for the origin of human life?” 15% said evolution, 50% said biblical creation and 26% said both. This poll reveals the widespread lack of knowledge of theories of origins.[/i]
Is it...meant to not add up to a hundred percent? :P

Otherwise, I quite liked your article. It flowed well together, and it ran primarily on logic, not passion, though it did have a nice amount of the latter.
Good job!

Haha, of course not! You made some valid points. I should have added in Lucy/Ardi and such into this.