Texas Public Schools Are Teaching Creationism

So, I generally don't equate 'Democratic Party' with 'Progressive' anymore, but at the state level I'll admit that one is at least closer than the other.

Did you read the rest of that paragraph? The cities tend to vote Democratic in state elections whereas the rural areas overwhelmingly vote Republican, and Texas has a lot of rural space. I'll also point out that the largest city in the U.S. to elect an openly gay mayor (reelected twice) is Houston, which I found entertaining because of the two Democratic candidates, she was the more 'conservative'. Austin isn't as 'weird' as it thinks it is.

I really think both sides get this issue very wrong.

Creationism is not valid science, obviously. But that's because it isn't science at all. It is a religious belief, which is by definition non-scientific.

Here is where the science side gets things wrong. Creationism is a NON-scientific belief, not an ANTI-scientific belief. It's not anti-intellectual or stupid or backward either. It's a choice to believe in the supernatural. Lots of people, even non-religious people, believe things on grounds other than science. Science is an excellent way of explaining the world, but it isn't the only way. People have the right to inform their beliefs with a source other than science.

Here is where the creationism side gets things wrong. Same basic principle, creationism is not a scientific belief. Christians, even those who accept evolution, believe a lot of things which are clearly not scientifically sound. Bodily resurrection from the dead is perhaps the most obvious and most fundamental. It's absurd to accept the resurrection of a deity without seeking scientific evidence and then try to make scientific evidence support creationism. Even if you convince someone that creationism is scientific, you aren't going to convince them that a deity being bodily resurrected from the dead is scientific. Given that Jesus' resurrection is the fundamental belief of Christianity, it's silly to make such a big deal of something that is comparatively non-important.

So my suggestion, teach evolution in science class without mentioning creationism at all. But require at least one class in religion/philosophy so students understand that there are other ways of understanding the world. I'm not saying to teach the beliefs of any particular religion, just to explain some of the ways other than science that people have historically and continue today to understand their world.

The overwhelming majority of people on Earth today are at least nominally religious. Schools shouldn't teach students to be religious, but they should teach them to understand religion... and not just as a cute, prehistoric way of explaining things that science now has exclusive domain over. Religious beliefs, as non-scientific beliefs, are non-falsifiable. Students need to understand this. Modern science does not falsify religious beliefs. It provides an alternative based on empirical evidence. But there is no requirement that everyone on Earth only accept things based on empirical evidence. It may seem odd to you to deliberately choose to believe something which isn't based on empirical evidence, but many people do (knowingly at that) and that is their right. Students should understand that science is not a tool for disproving religion, it is a tool for explaining the world in a different way than religion does.

Maybe they don't have the pack mentality of schooled individuals. Maybe they are individual instead of demographic bins that you biased mind can't put them in...

It's the Houston suburbs that are Republican, whereas the rest of our vast spread-out city) leans Democrat. Houston has one of the first openly gay mayors of a major U.S. city. From the Wikipedia article: "The cities of Houston, San Antonio, Dallas, Austin, and El Paso all presently have elected mayors with Democratic ties, and have voted Democratic in recent statewide and federal elections. However, the suburbs of these cities remain heavily Republican."

> Not to mention the fact that home-schooled kids are far, far behind "ordinary schooled" kids in terms of knowledge. How should they be other, after all?

I was homeschooled all the way through high school, and while I may not be the founder of Dropbox, I scored pretty high on the SATs and do very well for myself. So, [citation needed.]

While students in a public school are vying for the attention of a teacher amongst a group of 20 other students, I had the almost exclusive attention of a teacher very invested in my success for more than a decade. I'm not saying it's perfect, but there can be distinct advantages.