0
'Atheists' are a general grouping, not a specific one.
- Many have no opinion on the subject, and allow expert opinions to weigh the matter on their behalf.
- Some refuse the admission of creationism in public education as science (although private education may do what it pleases) because it is inherently unscientific and in many places, illegal to do so. Evolution is accepted because of its scientific support.
- Others make acceptance for creationism taught in religious classes, which is fair enough.
What else can I help you with?
What effect did darwins theory of evolution have on religious thought in america?
Many religions had to come to grips with the fact that the biblical creation story could not possible be anything more than metaphor. Some religious sects refuse to consider the overwhelming evidence amassed against their ideological positions and remain in denial of the truth.
What is Anti-Evolution?
Any person or organization that does not believe in the theory of evolution. However, apart from the theory of evolution there is also the evolutionary law that states that there is constant change in all things, which is different from saying that something evolved. Being anti-evolution may also contain the idea of one being actively opposed to something rather than merely not believing it or not knowing if it is really true of not. Some would say that it is synonymous with Anti-Science. Some lay people say that the facts of science are anti-evolution. This includes laws of science which are proven and have no known exceptions such as the Law of Biogenesis and the Second Law of Thermodynamics. They believe the fossil record is also anti-evolution. Genetics and Biochemistry are also anti-evolution. There actually are some scientists who believe in the theory of evolution, who also acknowledge that certain existing facts contradict it, while they still hold to it's overall philosophy. There is among many creation scientists the agreement that microevolution exists. That is, that there are changes which occur within the various species, but it is contained within the genetic code for each species. These same scientists deny that macroevolution has ever occurred, because they maintain that there is no evidence of any species changing to another species, rather the evidence points to the sanctity of each of the species. Assigning of species is arbitrary, even as Charles Darwin remarked: "I look at the term species as one arbitrarily given for the sake of convenience to a set of individuals closely resembling each other...", therefore the disagreement that exists between Evolutionist & creationists is compounded. Regarding those who claim that anti-evolution is anti-science, this would have to be demonstrated as being against scientific procedure or to deny officially undisputed scientific conclusions. Then, in oder to be anti-science, it would have to be shown that all the attitudes and conclusions would be tantamount to being against all scientific endeavors. It is better to examine the issues, rather than to demean other scientific efforts. There should be an honest evaluation of these issues by both proponents of evolution and those who are creationists. Yet that can be problematic, because the final decision in examining the existing evidence is shaded by whether one believes the Biblical account of creation or man's explanation of evolution. If one chooses to hold to either particular philosophy, an attempt to give unbiased examination of the available evidence should be seen as the best scientific effort towards the truth. An anti-Evolution is a Pro-Creation
Is evolution blasphemy against God?
Absolutely not. Or, at least, it is not intended to be blasphemous. It is, however, very well possible that those who have a heartfelt belief in Creation perceive it as blashemous.Answer:The answer depends upon both the one presenting the theory of evolution, as well as the one hearing it.a) If the presenter makes no implication of non-existence of God, that would be one thing. But if he/she insinuates that evolution happened and took place by itself with no push or guidance or anything, certainly that is blasphemous at least by implication.b) If the listener accepts the view that evolution happened or could have happened through the agency of God, the listener would likely not see certain presentations of evolution as blasphemous. But if the listener believes in recent Creation, and/or in direct Creation of the species, most if not all presentations of evolution would be unacceptable or blasphemous.
How did Simon Finch sort of go against the teaching of his Methodist religion?
The book talks about it in chapter one, on page 4 in my copy. It says that he made a lot of money, which goes against the Methodist belief of not "putting on gold and costly apparel." He also bought slaves, which is against their beliefs.
What is the evidence that God does not exist?
You might use as evidence such things as human suffering, or evolution. Neither of these disprove God, but some people may think that they do.See also:Is there evidence for God?
Why did some states ban the teaching of evolution?
Some states banned the teaching of evolution due to religious reasons, as it contradicted creationist beliefs. They believed that teaching evolution went against their religious views and wanted to prioritize alternative explanations such as creationism or intelligent design in the classroom.
Which trial involved the teaching of evolution in schools?
The Scopes Monkey Trial in 1925, also known as the State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes, involved the teaching of evolution in schools. John Scopes, a high school teacher, was charged with violating a state law that prohibited teaching evolution in public schools. The trial gained national attention as it pitted creationism against the theory of evolution.
What is the current status of the teaching of evolution and creationism?
Most western nations have a policy of separation of church and state, meaning that it is illegal to conduct religious indoctrination in public schools. That means that while evolution often is a part of the biology curriculum, teaching creationism as if it were true is illegal in state funded schools.
What did that Tennessee court decide in the scopes trial?
In the Scopes Trial of 1925 in Tennessee, the court found John Scopes guilty of teaching evolution, which was against state law. He was fined $100, although the verdict was later overturned on a technicality. The trial became a significant milestone in the debate between creationism and evolution in American education.
What positions did William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow each represent at the Scopes Trail?
Bryan represented the state which had a law against teaching evolution and believed totally the Bible account of the creation. Darrow was an atheist who was against the state law, defended evolution and Stokes's right to teach it.
Which two forces were set against each other in the scopes trail?
If you are refering to the Monkey Scopes trial then it would be evolution vs. creationism
He Scopes Trial was controversial because?
He was teaching evolution in the south-just think about why American Southerners might be upset about teaching evolution. It was against their political and religious beliefs.
What is the Supreme Courts decision on teaching Evolution and Creationism in the classroom?
The teaching of creationism in public schools has stood trial a number of times. At least two of such cases came before the US Supreme Court: Epperson v. Arkansas, 1968; Edwards v. Aguillard, 1987. In both instances, the US Supreme Court ruled against the statutes promoted by the creationist groupings concerned. In a number of other cases before district courts and federal courts, rulings were also against any statute that would require a religiously based modification to the biology curriculum, stating that such statutes are unconstitutional as they violate the establishment clause of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
The trial that pitted Creationists against Evoulutionists in 1925?
The trial was known as the Scopes Monkey Trial and took place in Dayton, Tennessee in 1925. It involved John Scopes, a high school teacher who was accused of teaching evolution in violation of state law. The trial garnered national attention and highlighted the debate between creationism and evolution in American society.
Why were many people exposed to the Scopes Monkey Trial?
The Scopes Monkey Trial garnered widespread attention because it was the first major legal case concerning the teaching of evolution in public schools. The trial pitted the theory of evolution against creationism, two highly debated topics at the time. This clash of ideas resulted in a high level of public interest and media coverage.
How come creationism isn't taught in public schools?
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.
Does creationism disprove adaptation?
No, creationism and adaptation are not mutually exclusive concepts. Creationism is a belief in a divine creator, while adaptation is a scientific process by which organisms change over time to better survive in their environment. Many people believe that adaptation is evidence of intelligent design by a divine creator.
