Analysis

The debate between proponents of creationism and defenders of evolution, two fundamentally different ways of viewing the origin of living organisms, has arguably been at its most divisive when placed in the context of education – a veritable culture war seems to be taking place between the conservative religious groups who want their say in the classroom and the scientists and skeptics who want to exclude what they perceive to be faith-based origin stories from being taught in schools.

Simply put, biological evolution; is described as changes in genetic material from one generation to the next over a long enough period, these changes accumulate and can cause changes in a species population and possibly birth a new species. From evolution comes the idea of common descent, the idea that all living organisms, including humans, originated from a single organism. In sharp contrast, creationism is the belief that everything, from the cosmos to life itself, was created in a supernatural manner by an equally supernatural being (usually characterized in the form of a religious deity, and in this context synonymous with the Judeo-Christian God). In the context of the debate, it is also the rejection of evolution and other scientific facts. Related to creationism is the idea of intelligent design, a movement which posits that due to the complexity of things found in the universe and in the world, an intelligent designer had to have created them. Intelligent design was developed as a way to present the idea of creation without direct religious language, though many proponents of intelligent design nonetheless believe the designer to be the Christian God.

Those opposed to the teaching of creationism and intelligent design contend that they are not legitimate sciences and relegate them to the realm of religious belief or pseudoscience, citing their lack of falsifiability of their claims; some equate teaching creationism and intelligent design to teaching that the earth is flat. The worry is that quality of education for students would suffer as a result of these religious challenges to evolution, and additionally that teaching creationism would directly violate the first amendment establishment clause in the Constitution. Proponents of creationism and intelligent design argue that their beliefs are scientific and true by nature, and that the acceptance of evolution is due to societal and ideological factors such as bias towards naturalism or against faith, and some claim that evolution is intrinsically a religion . In many cases they make the claim that their views are being excluded from schools because they are a legitimate threat to evolution, or that they are being persecuted by the current scientific institution.

The current movement seeks to give creationism and intelligent design time in the classroom alongside evolution, with many proponents of creationism and intelligent design arguing that schools should “Teach the Controversy”; instead of trying to directly remove evolutionary teachings from schools, as was attempted in the past, creationists and design advocates posit that both evolution and creationism/intelligent design should be taught from an equal standpoint, with the students deciding between the two. Their detractors say that the controversy is manufactured and merely a religious ploy.

The controversy is not solely a battle of scientific integrity— it is also a battle between politics and ideologies. The mission statements of Answers in Genesis (a leading proponent of Young Earth Creationism) and the Discovery Institute (a major force behind intelligent design) both reveal ideological backings to their respective causes. Likewise, those who support creationism will often argue that evolution is bad for society and morality, and that it also has an atheistic bias. While naturalistic in nature, science does not seek to disprove religious faith; in fact, it cannot prove or disprove supernatural claims. Nonetheless, the incompatibility of some personal beliefs with science has led many religious groups to embrace creationism and intelligent design, as they view evolution and other scientific principles as a threat to their faith and representative of an opposing worldview.

In analyzing the issue, all of the components of this debate must be taken into account: on a surface level, the battle is simply between the scientific integrity of two different explanations for the origins of life; but on a deeper level, the politics and ideologies that back these respective explanations illustrate the conflict between science and faith in our society, and the way that it affects education. With concepts such as the separation of church and state held in such high regard in our society, it is necessary that we view origin explanations such as creationism in a highly critical light.
Though in recent years there have been many large losses for creationism in the courts and in public school systems, its proponents continue to push forward. They continue to distort what science is and appeal to moral or ethical claims and various straw-men arguments. Their arguments are never purely scientific in nature, relying on misinterpretation and misinformation to win followers. With no scientific or factual basis to stand on, creationism is a view that cannot be taught in the classroom; giving it time in schools would weaken scientific education in our country due to its attack on legitimate science, especially scientific principles as important as evolution. Creationism isn’t necessarily a threat to evolution itself, but to the public perception of science and scientific facts and theories. Furthermore, the creationism politically strives to place religion in the classroom, a violation of the constitution and the principle of the separation of church and state.