They can both be taught in classrooms. However creationism cannot be taught as if it were scientifically verifiable fact in public schools, as it is not science, and the US Constitution prohibits federal or state funded (educational) institutions promoting religion. So if creationism is taught in public school, then it must be taught in comparative religion or philosophy classes, and not in Biology classes.
Since Creationism is seen as promoting religion, it can be taught in courses that are not science-related. See also:
Creationism is not taught in Ohio public schools as part of the science curriculum. It may be taught in a cultural or sociological classroom setting, depending on the teacher or school. Only evolution is taught as a scientific theory for the origin of life in biology/science classes.
Creationism can and should be taught in a sociology classroom setting, but not in a science classroom like some people want it to be. The reason for this is that creationism is not a scientific theory or even principle, it's part of cultural mythology.
indeed I do, but creationism belongs in religous education whereas Evolution belongs in science
In Ohio's Public School system, Evolution is taught in all science classes. "Creationism" is generally reserved for either private study, or a Religion Class. The State of Ohio does not have a law requiring this, but it is an understanding that a debate on creationism does not belong in a Science classroom, but rather a Theology classroom.
Most certainly not side-by-side. That would imply that they are equivalent notions. Evolution, however, is a scientific theory, and creationism is religious myth. Evolution belongs in biology classes, creationism in something like comparative religion courses.
Evolution can be taught in public schools because it is a verifiable scientific fact based on evidence. Creationism cannot be taught (at least, not as fact) in schools in the United States because it is a religious doctrine, and the Constitution says that Church and State must remain independent from one another. One is of course free to teach about creationism, for instance in comparative religion courses.
No. Teaching creationism alongside evolutionary theory would suggest that they are equivalent explanations. They are not. Evolutionary theory is a well-established scientific model; creationism is a religious myth, and should be taught as such.
Biblical creation was taught as fact in United States public schools until the latter part of the nineteenth century, because it was simply assumed that the Bible explained what really happened. From the late nineteenth century until the 1920s, the Theory of Evolution was accepted in the United States more or less without comment, and slowly began to be taught in schools. Then, in the early 1920s, a number of southern state legislatures began to pass legislation banning the teaching of evolution in public schools. It was the Tennessee law that was challenged in the infamous Scopes Trial of 1921, leading to creationism being withdrawn from public school science curriculums.The teaching of creationism having been found to be unconstitutional, attempts were then made over the following decades to have creationism taught alongside evolution, to rebadge creationism as 'science' in order to satisfy constitutional requirements, and to place stickers in science textbooks, to undermine acceptance of evolution and draw attention to creationism. All these attempts appear to have failed.For more information on the creationism debate, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/theology/the-story-of-creation
Creationism IS taught in public schools. There are many forms of creationism taught in mythology classes. Creationism, itself, is explored in philosophy classes. Biblical creation is taught in English and literature classes. Musical interpretations of Genesis are taught in music classes. Creationism is not taught in science classes because it is not supported by any scientific evidence whatsoever. It makes no verifiable predictions. It also has no practical application.
Mitt Romney believes that God created the universe, and evolution is the mechanism He used to create humans. Romney believes that science classes should have evolution taught, not creationism or intelligent design. He states that they are perfectly fine in a philosophy, religion, or history classroom. This is his view from 2008. It seems that he has been relatively quiet on this issue since he started running for the Republican nomination.
she says that its nessesary to know about creationism along with evolution
There is no legitimate reason for not teaching aboutcreationism. To deny students knowledge of common religious beliefs is cencorship. Creationism should be taught in schools - or rather, schools should inform students about creationism, explaining that there exist various religious subcultures that hold their creation stories to be literal truth.