Even in the old days, society fought for what they believed should be taught in schools. The two options of great interest were evolutionism and creationism. Often times, I questioned in my classrooms why we were able to discuss one theory and not the other. Were they not both theories? Could one not believe in evolution in the same fierceness that one would believe in a deity? For many years I did not understand, but simply looked at the subject objectively: I merely learned the material for passing the course. Nothing more, nothing less. I did not care for either subjects and saw them as useless wastes of time that I would regret learning about. Also, it did not sit well with me that they were both theories and only one was acceptable to teach.
So why is it that evolution is taught, yet creation is not?
In 1925, the matter was brought to the United State’s judicial branch. The trial, called the Scopes trial, was the opposite of the problems we encounter today. The professor taught evolution, which was recently passed as against the law. To read more on the Scopes trial, click here. Today, those in the judicial branch defend the teaching of evolutionism over creationism because of the “fact” involved with it – that is, though it is a theory, there is science involved and thus it can be taught purely in a scientific objective.
According to adl.org, creationism, however, can be discussed in public schools. We may teach it in a objective standpoint as well, but we must not “advocate or dissuade” it. Also, this does not stop students from discussing creationism in personal conversations. Creationism is purely resulting from belief, and though religious people may disagree, offers no evidence. Therefore, we can not use taxpayer dollars to educate our children on the matter. It is better learned outside of public school.
So what evidence does evolution hold for science’s sake? Teachthemscience.org reveals a simplified description of the links between evolution and humans.
Although the Scopes trial brought up great questioning as to what to teach students, its original intentions were not to defend/oppose creationism or evolutionism. In fact, according to rae.org, it was a stunt used to publicize the town that the trial took place in. How ironic that something that was meant to stir up a town, stirred up the entire nation more so.
Evolutionism is politically correct, while creationism is not. It does not matter what you believe in: it only makes sense that the factual is taught in a school setting. Please note that teachers and mentors are supposed to look at it from an objective perspective and will not try to persuade you to either side. Perhaps if I had knew this information before my Biology class freshman year, I would have paid more attention and actually appreciated what was being taught in an objective standpoint instead of shrugging it off and saying, “This is stupid! I just want a good grade!”