Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!decvax!microsoft!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!floyd!harpo!eagle!mhuxi!houxm!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uokvax!andree From: andree@uokvax.UUCP Newsgroups: net.religion Subject: Re: A Belated Reply to Paul Dubuc [from - (nf) Message-ID: <3285@uiucdcs.UUCP> Date: Sun, 30-Oct-83 00:15:22 EDT Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.3285 Posted: Sun Oct 30 00:15:22 1983 Date-Received: Fri, 21-Oct-83 04:49:13 EDT Lines: 43 #R:unc:-599000:uokvax:8300006:000:1994 uokvax!andree Oct 14 19:46:00 1983 Third (and last) in a series of replies to Paul Dubuc letter. The topic this time is what should/shouldn't be taught in schools. Or, why I don't think creationism (either scientific or religious) should be taught in schools. First, let me point out that (for purposes of this letter), all believes can be divided into two categories, each with two subcategories. These are: 1a) That view currently in vogue in the appropriate science; 1b) Any other views held by scientists (past or present); 2a) That view taught by my religion; 2b) Any views taught by other religions. Note that overlap is possible. Comments that I consider obvious: Things of class 1a should be taught in school. Things in class 1b should be relegated to a history of science class. If the verdict isn't in on some topic, it should be mentioned in school. Things of category 2 have no business anywhere in a school, except in a class on religion/mythology (side note: a mythology is a religion that currently has no believers; even if it does happen to be correct). Obviously, creationism does not qualify in category 1a; otherwise Paul wouldn't have complained about persecution of people who espouse the creationist theory in public. I will take it as given that creationism is in category 1b. So, the question comes down to whether or not the verdict on creationism is still out. Given that Paul admits that you can't get creationist papers published in the journals, I would have to say that the answer is no. I will admit that the scientific establishment is VERY close-minded on things that upset the order of the Universe. Creationism is one of these things. Given this, creationism is going to have to settle for the same kind of treatment that other `crackpot' theories (flat earth, jerk, Einstien was wrong, dianetics,etc) get This doesn't include being taught in science classes.