So I'm curious to get some intellectual opinions on this matter. Indiana recently passed a bill that essentially allows religion into science class in the US State. If you read that article, you'll see that at this point it's not forced, but it allows a school board to put it in without threat of Lawsuit from organizations like the ACLU.

I think my biggest beef with this is that most schools already have a separate class for religion, which is where that kind of thing should be taught. The kinds of things they want to teach in a SCIENCE class, aren't scientific at all. They have no right to be in there. The idea that kids should be taught both "theories on the origin of life" (implying creationism vs. evolution) is absurd, especially because evolution isn't an origin of life theory. Also, as the above article points out, a lot of people don't seem to understand the difference between a scientific theory and a non-scientific theory. Given these facts, I don't think religious teachings have any place in a scientific setting, and the fact that they're trying to teach them as an alternative to evolution is insulting and appear ignorant.

What are your thoughts?

I dont think religion should be taught in school at all. Leave that to the churches, family, and the individual. I could maybe see it as an elective, but then they should have an elective class for every religion, which is unrealistic. Im especially against forcing it on students in required classes like science. not everybody would be a follower of said religion, and others not a follower of any. Last place kids need other religions shoved down their throats is by teachers at school.

Sorry if this isn't exactly what the article was about, didnt actually read it since im leaving for an interview in a few minutes.

Middle/high school science classes are more or less introductions to scientific curriculum. It gives you a broad overview of what physics, chemistry, biology, etc. deal with, and the most important aspects, but it barely scratches the surface.

I can reasonably understand a section explaining the christian origin story of the big bang, but it should immediately be followed by a scientific explanation of what we've observed to be true, rather than what we've read in a story. The science should be granted more validity, since it's a damned science class, but it should be up to the kids to make up their own mind. As long as the origin stories aren't treated as fact.

As much as I'd like to say it should have no place in a scholastic setting, that's not really the world we live in.

I think its fine if its being taught in a seperate class away from the science curriculum. Neither my middle school or highschool had a religious studies class, and I know 2 of the other highschools didnt either. I was never taught about christianity or islam in school.

I didn't even know anyone in the world considered it appropriate to teach mythology in a science class until around the time I registered here (read: when I started using the internet properly and met Americans).

It should not be taught as a theory. It's a story. An allegory at best. Unless they want to include Sikh, Hindu, Ancient Egyptian, and Zoroastrian stories too and discredit them all one by one as an example of how to do science, they should be kept in RE lessons.

Quote from Zed

I didn't even know anyone in the world considered it appropriate to teach mythology in a science class until around the time I registered here (read: when I started using the internet properly and met Americans).

It's pathetic, isn't it?

Quote from Zed

I didn't even know anyone in the world considered it appropriate to teach mythology in a science class until around the time I registered here (read: when I started using the internet properly and met Americans).

It should not be taught as a theory. It's a story. An allegory at best. Unless they want to include Sikh, Hindu, Ancient Egyptian, and Zoroastrian stories too and discredit them all one by one as an example of how to do science, they should be kept in RE lessons.

That wouldn't actually be a bad idea. I could agree to it being taught in science class if thats how the curriculum was going to go.

For me, religion is kinda like my favourite sports team. I don't have a strongly convicted reason, it was just something I grew up with. Heck, I not even sure if I'd like Essendon if the choice was left up to me for when I turned 18.

And my religion is similar. I went to a primary school with RE classes. Not a particularly religious school, just some teacher would rock up every fortnight and teach us about the bible and stuff.

I can't see what's wrong with RE classes, even for atheists. I mean heck, you're going to be facing religious people in your life, maybe learn something about these people. Religion in science however? That does not sit well with me. I like my science and I want it to stay nice and logical.

Quote from Ashlander

That wouldn't actually be a bad idea. I could agree to it being taught in science class if thats how the curriculum was going to go.

According to the article that's what this bill allows, even scientology's origin story can be taught.

In answer to the question, a flat no. Religion is not a science and as a result in my mind has no place in a science class; anything purporting information as fact is not a science.

Do I think religion should be taught in schools? Again; no, not a single religion at least; it's important to be made aware of others beliefs; even respect them, but no one single system should be given priority over another in a public place.

I believe it's the duty of the religious body to educate it's followers, not a school, religion should start with a choice, and that choice should be well thought out and reasoned, that I believe; is what should be taught in schools.

Whether they should teach it, no. Unless they are capable of linking religious stories with science, it does not belong in that subject. It's quite clear that these 2 do not mix well and in the end someone would end up being offended as they aren't capable of comprehending reasoning and logic. But there would be a very very interesting class discussion afterwards.

I doubt any of those teachers are qualified to teach any religion. I would rather they not speak lies of people's faith, thinking what they say is truth.

Imagine the teachings

I live in Canada and I already have a course that I can take in grade 11 and 12 called "World Religions" or something close to that. It's a Social Sciences course and really wraps up everything you guys would be going for. I'll even admit that Religion is not a science. It's based upon belief and doesn't frequently use physical evidence(not as much as science does) to support it's claims.

I finished my grade 11 biology course just last semester and during the evolution unit, we didn't acutely talk about the origins of the earth. Those questions were always avoided and the teacher was always tolerant of contradictions to the seemingly conflicting implications our teacher made. The same sort of conflicts came up with classifying living things when we touched on the topic of Archaea. I think it should stay that way. Completely unbiased. Just giving the facts as they are.

I regard science as a truth and religion as a belief, so there wouldn't be any doubt in my mind that I wouldn't feel comfortable if both were in the same class. And going with what Ashlander said, I think it's better if places like church taught about religion rather than school because I think churches would do a better job. However, I wouldn't mind religion being an actual class at any school I know, I just wouldn't like it if it was a required course or anything like that.