Public schools should teach creationism alongside evolution in science classes

“This is false, as science has absolutely nothing to do with religion. In fact, history has often portrayed these two as opposites entirely.” Not true. This is a false dichotomy. Actually, religion and science, for a lot of years, walked together. “Many of the medieval universities in Western Europe were born under the aegis of the Catholic Church, usually as cathedral schools or by papal bull as Studia Generali. In the early medieval period, most new universities were founded from pre-existing schools, usually when these schools were deemed to have become primarily sites of higher education. Many historians state that universities and cathedral schools were a continuation of the interest in learning promoted by monasteries.” [1] Gregor Mendel, Father of Genetics, was a monk. Georges Lemaître, known for the Big Bang theory, was a priest. And actually, there’s a lot of scientists (without religious affiliation) who was funded by religious organizations, in special the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, who held names such as: Planck, Bohr, Hess, Alexander Fleming, Schrödinger, Hawking and the list just goes on with a lot of Nobel laureates. [2] [3] [4] “Science can in no way be compared to religion as it is not "just a matter of choice". Science is not an idea, or a way of thinking. The word science's definition is in fact "abranchofknowledgeorstudydealingwithabodyoffactsortruths". This truth does not change from a person to another, depending on his or her beliefs. This truth is the same for everyone. Believing in science or not believing in it is the same as believing or not in the truth.” This is false. Science in the terms that we are discussing, such as evolutionism, is not the truth. Science, in this case, is the search for accuracy. Truth is binary: you either have it, or you don’t. And science doesn’t necessarily is always right. And science is not something that you can totally trust. "Of the 53 landmark papers, only six could be proved valid." [5] “With no offense to Christians or to any other religious group, I find that using a book written thousands of years ago (by who knows?) to say that what people today with today's knowledge and technology prove is true is in fact wrong is rather unrealistic.” This is a fallacy, just because it is old it doesn’t mean that it is wrong. And people have the freedom to believe in what they want to believe. As I think I have already gotten my point across, I will not say too much on this, but can one's religious beliefs really be used to revoke affirmations made by scientists, using concrete proof, such as, as my opponent stated, fossils? Yes, it can. You can’t obligate a religious person to “believe in science”. “Although I see where you may have been going with this, as I have already demonstrated, the only thing I would be "imposing" on people is the truth. Although some people that believe in creationism may be denying themselves the facts and truth about evolution, I do not think this information should be denied from others.” You are saying that evolutionism is something that everybody should accept, which isn’t true. Those who want accept it, just do it. Those who don’t want, leave them alone. You may try to debate with them, but once their religion has a answer for everything, this will be hard. So the right thing to do is to respect their opinions and world view. “Although, the constitution of the USA may have been created for Christian people, times have changed. Back when it was created, 100% of Americans were Christians. Is that still the case? I believe not. It would be completely discriminating to make people of one religion learn another religion's ideas.” As I said before, who wants to learn creationism, will have the right to do so, but if one does not want to learn it, he should have his will respected. The same would work with evolutionism. The classes wouldn’t be mandatory. If I’m Sikh, I don’t need to learn neither of them, so I just won’t go to the classes. Is my opponent saying schools should not teach science as this discriminates religious people? No, since the fact of teaching chemistry for example, doesn’t touch or influence the faith of another person. Most of the holy books (“Bibles”) are free to interpretation, and most of the holy books (let’s cite three: Torah, Christian Bible and Quran) doesn’t even talk about atoms, elements, compounds, etc. But they do talk about the creation of everything, and that’s where their point of view should be respected. Because, in that case, why should math be taught either? I believe that science classes should only teach the "the scientific method thinking" that my opponent talked about. Math should be taught (and maybe even mandatory) because math is not science, math is a tool for the sciences. Math is even called the Queen of sciences. Classes should teach the “scientific method of thinking”, but not that THIS thing is right, and that THAT thing is wrong. This is a choice that only the person can make, to judge what is truth and what is not, in his/her world view. Sources [1] “THE ORIGIN OF UNIVERSTIES,” The University of Texas at Austin, [Online]. Available: http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu.... [2] “Nobel Laureates,” The Pontifical Academy of Sciences, [Online]. Available: http://www.casinapioiv.va.... [3] “Deceased Academicians,” The Pontifical Academy of Sciences, [Online]. Available: http://www.casinapioiv.va.... [4] “Ordinary Academicians,” The Pontifical Academy of Sciences, [Online]. Available: http://www.casinapioiv.va.... [5] “Science has lost its way, at a big cost to humanity,” Los Angeles Times, [Online]. Available: http://www.latimes.com....