Most religious creation myths teach that human beings (and every other form of life), were created specially, separate from all the others, for a particular divine purpose.
Evolutionary theory does not award the human race (or any other kind of life) with a special position. Each and every living thing is the end product, the summum, of a long history of surviving common ancestors, producing diverging lineages. According to evolutionary theory, we're special not because of our origins, but because of the characteristics we've evolved, which set us - but every other life form as well - apart from all the others. There is no overriding purpose to our being special, according to evolutionary theory. We're merely a product of differential reproductive success.
I believe that, in the basis, it is the issue of needing to be special in combination with the need for some overriding purpose that causes fundamentalists to reject evolutionary theory as an explanation for the diversity of life. See the answer below for an example of this.
Answer:
Fundamentalism, and religion in general, is at odds with evolutionary theory because evolutionary theory tends to be taught with the implicit message that God is not part (or need not be part) of the picture, that people do not have souls, and that there's no life after this one.
Fundamentalism, and religion in general, is at odds with evolutionary theory because evolutionary theory tends to be taught with the implicit message that God is not part (or need not be part) of the picture, that people do not have souls, and that there's no life after this one.
Religion believes that evolutionary theory as usually taught, is selling us short, is making "monkeys' uncles" out of us, is flying in the face of worldwide tradition, and is being misused.
(Some people believe in a God-guided evolution. With this particular view, religion has much less to argue. But that is usually not the way evolutionary theory is presented.)
See also:
I think it was 1987 when the Supreme Court ruled that no state could block the teaching of evolution and that creationism was religion and violated the Establishment Clause of the Constitution.
The Scopes Trial
The controversy regarding evolution is the debate about the validity of the scientific model sparked by the inability of various religious groupings to reconcile this scientific teaching with their religious views. This controversy is not a scientific one, but exists solely in the minds of those who would seek to suppress the teaching of scientific models that conflict with their beliefs.
Evolution is a process, theories of evolution are theories which explain that process
It is called "evolution".
Fundamentalists are at odds with the teaching of evolution because they believe it is not compatible with the teaching of creation. They believe the Bible teaches creation.
The conflict between the teaching of evolution and religious fundamentalism was brought to a head primarily due to the theory of evolution challenging literal interpretations of religious texts, particularly regarding the origin of life and humans. This conflict was further fueled by the growing influence of scientific advancement and education, as well as the rise of fundamentalist movements seeking to defend traditional religious beliefs.
well, obama is actually a plant. he was grown in the goverment officials garden. Thats why he goes outside to retrieve sunlight and drinks water. Hence photosynthesis.
The law prohibiting the teaching of evolution was upheld
John Scopes for teaching Evolution
The theme of "Inherit the Wind" revolves around the clash between fundamentalism and free thought, as seen through the lens of the Scopes Monkey Trial. The play explores issues such as the conflict between faith and science, the importance of freedom of speech and thought, and the need for open-mindedness and tolerance in society.
no it does not
John Scopes
John Scopes.
he was convicted for teaching evolution
Religious fanaticism
John Scopes for teaching Evolution