I had a lot of facts but I did not know how to present to be persuasive. Their friends are asking them questions.
Human timeline and Nature timeline Until the late 19th century, creation was taught in nearly all schools in the United States, often from the position that the literal interpretation of the Bible is inerrant. With the widespread acceptance of the scientific theory of evolution in the s after being first introduced inand developments in other fields such as geology and astronomypublic schools began to teach science that was reconciled with Christianity by most people, but considered by a number of early fundamentalists to be directly at odds with the Bible.
In the aftermath of World War Ithe Fundamentalist—Modernist Controversy brought a surge of opposition to the idea of evolution, and following the campaigning of William Jennings Bryan several states introduced legislation prohibiting the teaching of evolution. Such legislation was considered and defeated in in Kentucky and South Carolina, in passed in OklahomaFloridaand notably in in Tennesseeas the Butler Act.
Scopes accepted, and he started teaching his class evolution, in defiance of the Tennessee law. The resulting trial was widely publicized by H.
Mencken among others, and is commonly referred to as the Scopes Trial. Scopes was convicted; however, the widespread publicity galvanized proponents of evolution. When the case was appealed to the Tennessee Supreme Courtthe Court overturned the decision on a technicality the judge had assessed the fine when the jury had been required to.
Although it overturned the conviction, the Court decided that the law was not in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. We are not able to see how the prohibition of teaching the theory that man has descended from a lower order of animals gives preference to any religious establishment or mode of worship.
So far as we know there is no religious establishment or organized body that has its creed or confession of faith any article denying or affirming such a theory. The State Tenn. Consequently, the Court held that the ban on the teaching of evolution did not violate the Establishment Clause, because it did not establish one religion as the "State religion.
Arkansas that Arkansas 's law prohibiting the teaching of evolution was in violation of the First Amendment. The Supreme Court held that the Establishment Clause prohibits the state from advancing any religion, and determined that the Arkansas law which allowed the teaching of creation while disallowing the teaching of evolution advanced a religion, and was therefore in violation of the Establishment Clause.
This holding reflected a broader understanding of the Establishment Clause: Opponents, pointing to the previous decision, argued that this amounted to judicial activism. The Supreme Court of the United States has made several rulings regarding evolution in public education In reaction to the Epperson case, creationists in Louisiana passed a law requiring that public schools should give "equal time" to "alternative theories" of origin.
The Supreme Court ruled in in Edwards v. Aguillard that the Louisiana statute, which required creation to be taught alongside evolution every time evolution was taught, was unconstitutional.
The Court laid out its rule in Edwards as follows: The Establishment Clause forbids the enactment of any law 'respecting an establishment of religion. First, the legislature must have adopted the law with a secular purpose. Second, the statute's principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion.
Third, the statute must not result in an excessive entanglement of government with religion. KurtzmanU. State action violates the Establishment Clause if it fails to satisfy any of these prongs. Aguillard  The Court held that the law was not adopted with a secular purpose, because its purported purpose of "protecting academic freedom " was not furthered by limiting the freedom of teachers to teach what they thought appropriate; ruled that the act was discriminatory because it provided certain resources and guarantees to " creation scientists " which were not provided to those who taught evolution; and ruled that the law was intended to advance a particular religion because several state senators that had supported the bill stated that their support for the bill stemmed from their religious beliefs.
"There is scientific evidence for creation from cosmology, thermodynamics, paleontology, biology, mathematical probability, geology, and other sciences." "There are many scientists in each field who conclude that the scientific data best support the creation model, not the evolution model.". This index contains a list of keywords that are common in discussions of creation and evolution. If you can't find what you're looking for here, try the search facility, An Index to Creationist Claims. And yes, "special creation" means a Creator had to have done this. Next we have. The decay of earth's magnetic field. One of the benefits of living in today's world is that we not only have ample evidence the magnetic field is diminishing, thanks to all the beached whales .
While the Court held that creationism is an inherently religious belief, it did not hold that every mention of creationism in a public school is unconstitutional: We do not imply that a legislature could never require that scientific critiques of prevailing scientific theories be taught.
Indeed, the Court acknowledged in Stone that its decision forbidding the posting of the Ten Commandments did not mean that no use could ever be made of the Ten Commandments, or that the Ten Commandments played an exclusively religious role in the history of Western Civilization.Evolution weakens faith in God, undermines the arguments for God's existence, and is a fundamental tenet of all unbelievers.
True, some people claim to believe evolution and also believe in God. Evidences for God, Jesus, and the Bible: Creation This is part of a complete series of evidences for the major claims of the Bible that God exists, the Bible is God's word, and Jesus is God's Son. This article must be studied in context of the whole series of articles.
The creation–evolution controversy made widely publicized claims that it was a new science, Almost universally these have been shown to be quote mines that do not accurately reflect the evidence for evolution or the . Evidence for Creation. Creation overflows with evidence that points toward the Creator God.
The design and complexity of life loudly declare, “There is a God!”. The overwhelming majority of the scientific evidence shows that the earth is very young, contrary to the evolution myth.
Evolution Fraud and Myths. In an attempt to further their careers and justify the claims that evolution is a legitimate theory, many scientists have fraudulently deceived the world by planting or reconstructing fossils which they would claim to be authentic finds.