Sarah Palin wants creationism taught in science classes

So then as long as they add the disclaimer you propose, you also have no problem with creationism being taught in science classes.

He did not say he approves, but that others do.

I wondered if maybe this one of the reasons she was picked. Are there enough "Creationist" votes out there to make a difference?

Obviously Creationism should not be taught in science class. Not only is it not science, but it conflicts with our constitution. The top office in the country is supposed to protect and defend the constitution, not dismantle it and kick it aside. Attacking the constitution is the same as attacking the United States itself.

Trying to put Creationism into school is a very "Bushy" thing to do, and I thought McCain wanted to distance himself from that.

OK, I'll bite.

How does teaching a theory conflict with our Constitution and how is it the same as "attacking the United States itself."?

While I dont agree that creationism should be taught in a science class, I would have no problem with it being discussed in a philosophy class, or in any other class that deals with reasoning and thinking.

I only said science class. If you want to teach it in comparative religion class that's fine.

But honestly you're missing the point if you think that all these people want is to introduce a comparative religion class. We already have those. What they want is to put the bible back into school and to give it equal status with science. And that conflicts with the first amendment. And intentionally trying to bypass the first amendment is trampling on the constitution and that's an attack on the foundational ideas of the US.

As I read it he is saying, (as I think you perfectly well understand), that if it enters the science classroom at all, it should be only as a perfect exemplar of what ISN'T science, but makes laughable claims to be so...so that students may better comprehend what science IS so that they may better recognize all such travesties of science.

I have no problem with creationism being mentioned in schools along with the scientific explanation of creation... but please tell ALL the creation stories then and not just the Christian one. That'll prepare our youth to compete with China and other countries where children are being taught life skills all right.

Why don't we teach alien abduction theories in schools?

Creationism is not science and has no business in a classroom. Teach it at home or church if you must.

Is literature science?
Is english composition science?
What about civics (govt)?
Are they science?

Are you actually saying that only science can be or should be taught in a classroom?
That would eliminate many subjects taught in schools today.

Uh, no. She's saying (and I agree) that you don't teach literature, composition, or civics in science class, so why would you teach religion?

This is really all that should need be said. Arguments for creationism in the class go in circles around this simple fact, but cannot alter it.

Of course, there is much outside the realm of science which should be taught in schools. Perhaps Creationism has a place in another classroom setting (Social Studies, Religious Studies, Anthropology, etc.) to illustrate diversity among belief systems but it certainly shouldn't be taught in a science classroom.

Democratic 2008 Platform on the subject...

Line 18-38 on page 19
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/Platform%208%207%2008%20(2).pdf

Science, Technology and Innovation

America has long led the world in innovation. But this Administration's hostility to science has taken a toll. At a time when technology helps shape our future, we devote a smaller and smaller share of our national resources to research and development.

It is time again to lead. We took a critical step with the America Competes Act and we will start by implementing that act "then we will do more. We will make science, technology, engineering, and math education a national priority. We will double federal funding for basic research, invest in a strong and inspirational vision for space exploration and make the Research and Development Tax Credit permanent. We will invest in the next generation of transformative energy technologies and health IT and we will renew the defense R&D system. We will lift the current Administration's ban on using federal funding for embryonic stem cells"cells that would have otherwise have been discarded and lost forever"for research that could save lives. We will ensure that our patent laws protect legitimate rights while not stifling innovation and creativity.

We will end the Bush Administration’s war on science, restore scientific integrity, and return to evidence-based decision-making.
In sum, we will strengthen our system, treat science and technology as crucial investments, and use these forces to ensure a future of economic leadership, health well being and national security.

science should be what is taught is science class. Creationism should be mentioned in a social science class maybe, but not a biological science class. It also should not be taught as if it is true or might be true, it should be taught as a myth that a certain number of people believe in.

.

And if you read my posts, thats exactly what I have been saying about the subject.

So? You aren't a candidate for the White house and what you are saying about it is simply not the same as what the creationist Palin is saying about it.

She's saying we should teach "both" evolution and creation in science class on equal footing:



That's the nonsense I'm arguing against: the idiotic notion that creation is a scientific theory when it doesn't meet any of the criteria to be considered science and that it should be given equal representation in the science classroom.

I don't mind if it's taught in the "Stupid things people believe" class, but this is nothing of the sort. This is an attempt to treat creationism like a science.

I always want to ask people who think that creationism is a scientific theory: which part of that theory is testable? lol

Cycloptichorn

If we knew the answer, then what? Poof or pooooooooooooooooooooooof?
I'm still stuck on that 'chicken or egg' thing.