Judge Cuthbert W. Pound contributed by Peter Hodge
Evolution is a widely accepted scientific theory supported by extensive evidence, and should be taught in science classes. Creationism, however, is based on religious beliefs and is not supported by scientific evidence, so it is not appropriate to be taught in a science classroom. It may be more suitable for discussion in courses on religion or philosophy.
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.
The only thread of common bond among science, art and religion is Human Mind. Human mind created god and religion out of fear; human mind discovered the branch of study in the physical world and named it as science; human mind identified the aesthetic part of nature and nurtured it through art. The rest of all what is of science, art and religion are differences.
The theory of evolution was big and many religious people disagree with it. Now there are 2 party's the Christians Muslims monks etc they are religious and will tell you god made the world but the Evolutionists will tell you about the big bang.
Yes, most public schools will teach evolution in their life science classes, such as Biology. However, some states, especially those in the southern United States try to circumvent the law by avoiding the teaching of evolution altogether because of the controversy surrounding it.
The role of science is neither to accept or reject religion. These are two separate areas of human endeavor.
Einar Thallackson has written: 'Science, evolution, religion' -- subject(s): Religion and science
although science does matter evolution might be true to some religion but not to all
Thornwell Jacobs has written: 'The new science and the old religion' -- subject(s): Religion and science, Evolution
Frank Lewis Marsh has written: 'Evolution, creation and science' -- subject(s): Religion and science, Evolution, Creation
For religion, God. For science, evolution.
Herman Brunswick Kipper has written: 'Christianity and the gamut of evolution' -- subject(s): Evolution, Miscellanea, Religion and science, Science
Science is known while religion is unknown.Science is physically proven while reliogion is mentally proven. Thus science is in the past while religion is in the future. However, both science and religion does not raise the standard of human evolution and the middle path between these two extremes is 'spiritual'. A spiritual journey travel inwards while science and religion delve on outwardly matters.
Howard MacQueary has written: 'The evolution of man and Christianity' -- subject(s): Religion and science, Evolution, Christianity, Doctrinal Theology
John F. Haught has written: 'Science and Religion' -- subject(s): Religion and science, History 'God after Darwin' -- subject(s): Accessible book, Evolutietheorie, Theologie, Evolution, Geloof en wetenschap, Christianity 'Making sense of evolution' -- subject(s): Evolution, Christianity 'The cosmic adventure' -- subject(s): Religion and science 'God After Darwin' -- subject(s): Christianity, Evolution, Religious aspects, Religious aspects of Evolution 'Mystery and promise' -- subject(s): Mystery, Revelation, Promises, God 'Deeper Than Darwin'
Hubert Vecchierello has written: 'Science and philosophy' -- subject(s): Philosophy, Science 'Einstein and relativity' -- subject(s): Cosmology, Relativity (Physics) 'Evolution - fact or fancy?' -- subject(s): Evolution, History, Religion and science
its the monkey trial.