Why creationism isn't taught in schools

This is a real hot topic amongst both scientists and theologians, particularly in the United States, with strong efforts made to force schools to teach creationist theories alongside evolutionary theories in science classes. The idea behind this officially is that evolution, and in particular Darwinian evolution is only a theory and as such, teaching an alternative theory would offer a credible alternative based on Christian teaching. What is interesting is that despite scientists certainty that they are correct, they will not countenance an opportunity to comprehensibly debunk a widely held alternative theory. This seems slightly at odds with scientific education wherein the principle is to convey the concept of truth through rigorous scientific investigation and analysis. Again we have an official reason, namely that the teaching of creationism within the context of science lessons would give credence to the idea that creationism has any scientific validity. For me this is something of a nonsense if for no other reason than the research evidence that suggests that 40% of Americans polled in 2005 believed in creationism, with similar figures in Russia, Europe and even higher in the Middle East. This suggests rather more strongly that Creationism is already an established belief and that teaching it in a science class would make little difference to how it is perceived, other than to raise questions in the minds of students.

This is where the real issue comes in. It has long been established that having a population that is divergent in its beliefs, and that tends towards uncritical analysis of evidence is far easier to control than one which is well educated and tending towards questioning and reasoning. So, who gains from encouraging children to accept what they are told unquestioningly? The answer is almost certainly not the church, since almost all branches of Christianity, and most branches of other religions actively encourage questioning, dialogue and investigation by practitioners. Indeed it is one of the characteristics of a cult, as defined by legal precedent, that the members are restricted from questioning doctrine. So, does it benefit the scientific community? Hardly, since one of the principles of scientific discovery is the ability to question, and to argue based on logic and evidence, so introducing children to alternative theories early on and assisting them in understanding rational and logical argument and evidence based debate would only increase the childs ability to move on to more complex and difficult areas of study. So who does it benefit? The answer lies in the source of legislation on this area. That legislation comes initially from the court system, but is backed by government legislature, the government being in large part funded by corporations who are fundamentally opposed to the citizenry being able to question anything too deeply, the courts being in large part build on political appointments.

My personal opinion is that not only should creationism be taught in schools, but so should the ancient astronaut theory, as should creation stories from the many other faiths. In this way the student is introduced to the way that stories develop and change over time and the concept of alternative views that must be decided between based on evidence and debate. In this way you establish a framework within which a generation is brought through that is able to question the status quo, and that, by analysis is able to differentiate between reality and misdirection. This is not to say that misdirection and arguing for the sake of argument isn't fun, but it should serve as a learning tool to encourage understanding rather than being brushed aside as irrelevant nonsense.