Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − + + + + +
Darwinian teaching would give children ‘ … a doctrine that refutes not only their belief in God, but their belief in a Savior and belief in heaven, and takes from them every moral standard that the Bi
The motive for teaching [[evolution]] is to support the view that God does not exist, or exists but is unimportant. If schoolchildren were permitted to believe (and say) that evolution is less likely than [[intelligent design]], it would contradict the philosophical underpinnings of [[unguided evolution]]. This would lead students to question, even to reject, such [[materialism|materialist]] philosophies as [[atheism]] and [[secular humanism]].
The motive for teaching [[evolution]] is to support the view that God does not exist, or exists but is unimportant.
{{quotebox|[[William Jennings Bryan]], the chief spokesman against evolution, was concerned that teaching evolution would undermine the biblical foundation for moral teaching. He said that Darwinian teaching would give children ‘ … a doctrine that refutes not only their belief in God, but their belief in a Savior and belief in heaven, and takes from them every moral standard that the Bible gives us’. [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5625/]}}
If schoolchildren were permitted to believe (and say) that evolution is less likely than [[intelligent design]], it would contradict the philosophical underpinnings of [[unguided evolution]]. This would lead students to question, even to reject, such [[materialism|materialist]] philosophies as [[atheism]] and [[secular humanism]].
A more honest way of teaching about evolution would not be to present it as an unquestionable dogma, but simply to tell pupils what it is, how many scientists of various types believe in it; then to present all the scientific evidence for and against it.
A more honest way of teaching about evolution would not be to present it as an unquestionable dogma, but simply to tell pupils what it is, how many scientists of various types believe in it; then to present all the scientific evidence for and against it.