Evolution cant be taught in Public School?

Humanity has always had a powerful desire to assign meaning and purpose to the universe and our lives. Indeed, this is a unique characteristic that has propelled our inquiry into the origins of species and mankind. This has been historically true, the words of Homer puts it quite nicely, "as young birds instinctively open their mouths for food, all men crave for gods".

This truth is the essence behind the creation vs evolution debate worldwide. Although the acceptance of evolution theory is overwhemingly agreed upon by most scientist, it is vehemently opposed within many religious circles. So strong is their opposition, a new theory was formed masked with a scientific approach, intelligent design. Alternate theories such as intervention theory has yet to break the fold.

Under the Establishment Clause the push for the teaching of creation theory in public school has been rightly shot down. The Supreme court ruled that the teaching of creation theory "advances religion" and cannot be taught in a public setting. Creation theory clearly advances religion but we seldom see how Evolution theory does as well.

A new era has emerged in which New Thought has catapulted ideas into mainstream thinking. These ideas have begun to form into religions such as New Age and Scientology. Unfortunately this has become problematic for evolution proponents as these new religions have incopoprated evolution theory into their theology.

That being said, due to the influx of new religions the teaching of evolution in public school clearly advances Scientology and New Age religion.

Scientology:
One cannot deny the fact that Scientology was clearly influenced by evolution theory. In A History of Man, Ron Hubbard claims to provide "a coldblooded and factual account of your last sixty trillion years." It has become a key text for the Church of Scientology and is Ron Hubbards attempt to detail and explain evolution within a Scientology context. It gives an account of your life as a clam through a caveman and has been ridiculed by many critics. 1

New Age:
New Age religion is also grounded in evolution theory. It attempts to create "a worldview that includes both science and spirituality". 2 Although New Agers hold many diverse views of humanity its central precepts allude to the continued evolution of mankind from a physical being into a god-like spiritual being, beginning a New Age! This idea has even seeped into mainstream thinking by popularising the year 2012. The year in which humanity will begin its next stage of evolution.

Under the Establishment Clause of the US can we see how the incorporation and influence of evolution theory can violate this Law. Or is this an invalid comparison?

References:

1. Jon Atack, A Piece of Blue Sky, Lyle Stuart, (1990).

2. Neville Drury, The New Age: Searching for the Spiritual Self, pg. 10. London, England, UK: Thames and Hudson (2004)

Edited by Fula - 19-Jul-2012 at 17:30

Fula, I don't understand exactly what are trying to say, but I will say something which I consider useful, regarding the evolutionism.


I don't want to open a dispute, so don't expect to continue the discussion, excepting if I find something else useful to say.

Paradoxally, any theory is not a step futher but a limitation. When you believe you know something, you actually deprive yourself from seeking / searching more.


Atheism / evolutionism is as dogmatic and self-limiting as various religions, not to mention hilarious. I mean, how naive one can be to believe that mattery can have rational perceptions about itself? This is illogical and absurd as I wonder how nobody ironized it in some comedy sketch     !



There are some psychological and social factors that make people adopt atheist belief (yes, is a belief, that means a convinction) and kill their brain with it not much different than religionists do the same thing with their religious beliefs.

One of these factors is that few people can escape narcissism (not the one considered pathological but a more 'normal' one) and admit that they are stupid and limited. Is natural for someone to believe he's intelligent, superior bla-bla. I noticed the same narcissist tendencies at islamists and proselytist atheists, I mean under the masque of their belief, they actually try to feed their self-adoration and triumphalist delusions.

Other factor is that when something come to be considered 'normal', most people tend to conform in a hypocritical way, they don't have the courage to stand against the crowd because they fear for their social comfort. And many idiotic things are or were considered 'normal' in society, leading to more perversion of characters and social norms. The society is actually a nuthouse, both by absurdity of its 'values' and by the psychological disorders of individuals as result of this conformism.

This conformism is manifesting both in religious and 'scientifical' envinronments. People are so sick, that if one is not like them, they believe he is crazy.

I am neither afarid of it's inclusion nor will necessarily reject in the entirety it's precepts. It has value in it's original objectivity and enforcement of the scientific method. My personal faith does not require nor does it dismiss it. It simply is.

Menu, you equate Evolutionists with Atheists.  Aside from being entirely false, your stepping over the line.  If someone believes in science that makes him a "Nutcase"?  Okay, then what does believeing in an ethereal, omnipotent supernatural being, that no one can see and can't be proven to exist, make you? 

Originally posted by Menumorut Atheism / evolutionism is as dogmatic and self-limiting as various religions

Atheism is not dogmatic, it's logical and scientific. Science does not accept any god, and so does atheism.

Originally posted by Centrix Vigilis Originally posted by TITAN_ [QUOTE=Menumorut] Atheism / evolutionism is as dogmatic and self-limiting as various religions   Atheism is not dogmatic, it's logical and scientific. Science does not accept any god, and so does atheism.

Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 20-Jul-2012 at 13:49

If pastors, priests. rabbis, and "so called" Christians would stop their false (old Earth) and foolish (young Earth) teachings, and start promoting the truth of Genesis (Observations of Moses), then there would hardly be any room for the ridiculous teaching of evolution. 

Collectively, Bible believers are so "blind", that their approach to Genesis is a joke.  Instead of seeking the truth, they continue to support the current lies and foolishness of Creationism.  Genesis does not have any "Creation accounts".  When you keep telling a person that their car is running out of gas, and they refuse to look at the fuel gauge and go to the gas station, you begin to wonder how "dumb" they are.  

Herman Cummings

Creationism teaches false (old Earth, non literal), and foolish (young Earth, sometimes literal) doctrines.  There are no "creation accounts" in Genesis.  The reason that chapter one and chapter two are out of sequence, is because the mankind of chapter one was from 64 Million BC, and Adam was from 7200 BC.  The PowerPoint presentation of the "Observations of Moses" proves it to be true.  But both churches and academia are scared of the presentation, because it exposes both of them to be wrong.

Not in my Bible. :/

I've heard the same thing. It might be true but it's probably not something alot of people know much about.