lies and the clergy at their church. Why do weneed to this? Is it simply to introduce a theory about how Charles Darwin believed theworld was created?Another problem is the fact that religion is not supposed to be discussed. Thishas changed over the years to some extent, but not enough to support any beliefs in theschool buildings. If we teach creation alongside of evolution, we are getting away fromthe scientific part of the discussion and basing the proof of our theories on faith. Students and teachers are not allowed to pray in school, they are not allowed to holdBible studies in school and they are not allowed to promote certain religions to otherswithin the school. Why then should we start a discussion that will more than likely leadto a religious discussion and then cut it off when it does? If we teach creation alongside of evolution, what creation do we teach? Do wecover Christianity and Native American stories and leave out others? Do we try to teacha bit of all of the creation stories? No, we only bring up the Genesis accounts. Thisleaves out many other religions and beliefs. If we attempt to cater to all the creationstories, we find ourselves in a theology course or a social studies course rather than thescience we intended to support. As far back as 1925 we see court cases that bring up this issue. In Dayton,Tennessee a man by the name of John Thomas Scopes, a high school biology teacherwent against the law and taught evolution theory to his students. At this time theteaching of any creation theory had been banned in Tennessee probably for the samereason I am arguing. Many other court cases have come up since then arguing for oneside or the other; creationism vs. evolution. The people who supported creationismlooked at it from a scientific standpoint and called it Creation science, but this onlyworked for a while until another case brought this idea to an end. The establishmentclause in the constitution ruled...
