And lastly: Is a "proper high school" one that promotes secularism and atheism over any other religion? Seems to me like high schools today are trying to suppress religious thought. Furthermore, are you telling me that private schools aren't "proper high schools?"
Edwards v. Aguillard: Supreme court decision stating that teaching creationism for the purpose of promoting christianity is unconstitutional, however it also says that "teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind to school children might be validly done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction." As of now, evolution is the only theory that is taught relating to the origin of humankind.
the establishment clause: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."
the free exercise clause: "...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
What this means to you: the government cannot favor one religion over another, but it does allow the free education thereof. And it says nothing about banning teaching religious ideas for the purpose of education.
"Contact your congressman today. Bring creationism back in the classroom" Nope, not gonna happen. If you went to a proper high school you would learn about the Constitution and what the establishment clause is. The supreme court has rules countless times that teaching creationism is unconstitutional. Did your teachers teach you evolution wasn't science? They need to be fired, and you need to go to a proper high school.
last thing. Please don't carry on your evolution v. creationism debates on this video. I'm a freshman who's simply doing a project for school, and i'm most certainly not an expert in this field. I do believe in Creationism, but i don't have all the answers, nor do i want to carry on a debate. So if you believe evolution, thats fine by me, but please take your debates somewhere else. Thanks
Lastly, simply teaching creationism is not violation of church and state any more than teaching Hinduism and Buddhism in world history class is. I'm not saying schools should teach it as fact, but alongside evolution as another viable explanation for the origin of life, because many don't believe in evolution (myself included), and frankly, no one can come up with a way to test the theory.
Also, separation of church and state was first conceived not in the first amendment, but in a letter form Thomas Jefferson around that time to a group in Philadelphia, and thus cannot really be considered law. At the time the consitiution was drafted, education was primarily run by churches; the writers did not expect that school would become a public institution.
While I agree that there are fossils before the cambrian era, the cambrian era fossil record shows a vast variety of species, all which could not have devolved due to random evolution.
To address your video: Creationism is not allowed in schools because it is religion. Separation between church and state restricts this, as it is in violation of our 1st amendment rights. Second, "Both are theories and cannot be proven true or false". No, creationism is a hypothesis at best. Creationism cannot be proven NOR falsified (since you cannot test 'god').
A good Theory HAS to be falsifiable, that is how science works. Creationism is on a pedestal and cannot be falsified.
this law, because God created all things perfect, and then they became not so perfect.
Finally, the fossil record does not support evolution. According to the fossil record, a burst of life happened in the Cambrian era. This isn't evolution. Evolution is gradual, bot explosive. A burst of life indicates creation more than it indicates evolution. Thus, the fossil record supports creation.
There are plenty of fossils in the pre-cambrian of soft-bodied organisms, you are quite mistaken. The cambrian explosion is simply due to the development of hard parts which allowed better preservation of species.
A "burst of life" does not support creation, otherwise one would find a cambrian bunny rabbit, a devonian dog or a silurian simian. Show me ONE anachronistic fossil, and we'll talk.
First of all, let me clarify that this is about macroevolution, not microevolution.
Evolution is not proven by any means. Science is about facts. Facts can be tested. Testing involves observation or modeling. Neither of these work for evolution; you can't go to the past to observe it, nor can you build a model for it.
Secondly, creationism is a valid theory. The law of entropy states things go from order to disorder, from complex to less complex. Evolution says the opposite. Creationism fits
And lastly: Is a "proper high school" one that promotes secularism and atheism over any other religion? Seems to me like high schools today are trying to suppress religious thought. Furthermore, are you telling me that private schools aren't "proper high schools?"
jedyobidan 10 months ago
Edwards v. Aguillard: Supreme court decision stating that teaching creationism for the purpose of promoting christianity is unconstitutional, however it also says that "teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind to school children might be validly done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction." As of now, evolution is the only theory that is taught relating to the origin of humankind.
jedyobidan 10 months ago
the establishment clause: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."
the free exercise clause: "...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
What this means to you: the government cannot favor one religion over another, but it does allow the free education thereof. And it says nothing about banning teaching religious ideas for the purpose of education.
jedyobidan 10 months ago
"Contact your congressman today. Bring creationism back in the classroom" Nope, not gonna happen. If you went to a proper high school you would learn about the Constitution and what the establishment clause is. The supreme court has rules countless times that teaching creationism is unconstitutional. Did your teachers teach you evolution wasn't science? They need to be fired, and you need to go to a proper high school.
carlsm95 10 months ago
Trololololololol
SuperHuman91 11 months ago
last thing. Please don't carry on your evolution v. creationism debates on this video. I'm a freshman who's simply doing a project for school, and i'm most certainly not an expert in this field. I do believe in Creationism, but i don't have all the answers, nor do i want to carry on a debate. So if you believe evolution, thats fine by me, but please take your debates somewhere else. Thanks
-Jedyobidan
jedyobidan 11 months ago
Overachiever
Pillow676 11 months ago
Lastly, simply teaching creationism is not violation of church and state any more than teaching Hinduism and Buddhism in world history class is. I'm not saying schools should teach it as fact, but alongside evolution as another viable explanation for the origin of life, because many don't believe in evolution (myself included), and frankly, no one can come up with a way to test the theory.
jedyobidan 11 months ago
Also, separation of church and state was first conceived not in the first amendment, but in a letter form Thomas Jefferson around that time to a group in Philadelphia, and thus cannot really be considered law. At the time the consitiution was drafted, education was primarily run by churches; the writers did not expect that school would become a public institution.
jedyobidan 11 months ago
@bailesie
While I agree that there are fossils before the cambrian era, the cambrian era fossil record shows a vast variety of species, all which could not have devolved due to random evolution.
jedyobidan 11 months ago
To address your video: Creationism is not allowed in schools because it is religion. Separation between church and state restricts this, as it is in violation of our 1st amendment rights. Second, "Both are theories and cannot be proven true or false". No, creationism is a hypothesis at best. Creationism cannot be proven NOR falsified (since you cannot test 'god').
A good Theory HAS to be falsifiable, that is how science works. Creationism is on a pedestal and cannot be falsified.
bailesie 11 months ago
this law, because God created all things perfect, and then they became not so perfect.
Finally, the fossil record does not support evolution. According to the fossil record, a burst of life happened in the Cambrian era. This isn't evolution. Evolution is gradual, bot explosive. A burst of life indicates creation more than it indicates evolution. Thus, the fossil record supports creation.
jedyobidan 11 months ago
@jedyobidan
There are plenty of fossils in the pre-cambrian of soft-bodied organisms, you are quite mistaken. The cambrian explosion is simply due to the development of hard parts which allowed better preservation of species.
A "burst of life" does not support creation, otherwise one would find a cambrian bunny rabbit, a devonian dog or a silurian simian. Show me ONE anachronistic fossil, and we'll talk.
bailesie 11 months ago
First of all, let me clarify that this is about macroevolution, not microevolution.
Evolution is not proven by any means. Science is about facts. Facts can be tested. Testing involves observation or modeling. Neither of these work for evolution; you can't go to the past to observe it, nor can you build a model for it.
Secondly, creationism is a valid theory. The law of entropy states things go from order to disorder, from complex to less complex. Evolution says the opposite. Creationism fits
jedyobidan 11 months ago
The Theory of Evolution is extremely testable and maleable. It has already been altered and changed several times.
The word 'theory' in science means 'a well-tested explanation'. Creationism is not a scientific theory. The ToE is.
Why teach one, but not the other? For the same reason that we teach heliocentrism, but not geocentrism.
FiverBeyond 11 months ago
ew generic transition effects
shawnachu 11 months ago
@shawnachu Yay 4 trolls
Pillow676 11 months ago