Great discussion over at Adam Laats’ blog. Go check it out. Here’s an excerpt (emphasis in original):
Assuming teachers could embrace this goal of “understanding-not-belief,” do you think young-earth creationists would go for it? That is, would creationists who hold ideas that differ radically from the mainstream scientific consensus agree to allow their kids to learn evolution, IF the public schools agreed not to meddle with their children’s religious beliefs about evolution?
Smart people are skeptical. With good reason. At the recent blockbuster debate between young-earth creationist Ken Ham and science popularizer Bill Nye, for example, Ham did not take the role of a religious dissident, but rather insisted that creationism meant superior science. Creationists have always insisted that their beliefs are better science, not just a religious dissent from good science.
So I ask again: Will creationists accept public education that teaches real evolution—and only real evolution—in science classes, IF that education remains stubbornly neutral about related religious beliefs?
Your first URL is messed up.
Thank you! Hope all is well.
It is, thanks. Because you have delightfully added to Dr Laat’s post, I’ll also follow suit.
I’d probably not group creationists into one group. It’s hard to speak of them as a whole when they don’t really have a governing body or anything similar. I’m not sure if you mean the majority of creationists, the majority of people who view certain types of creation understandings in an ideological and dogmatic and exclusive way, or if you mean creationist institutions and organisations that have official standings.