UCTAA churchlight

Site Search via Google

Meditation 307
Disguised Religious Instruction

To open a discussion on this article, please use the contact page to provide your comments.

The fight over the teaching of "Intelligent Design" as an alternative to the scientifically accepted theory of evolution continues in the United States even though the credible evidence to support "Intelligent Design" is striking only in its total absence.

In reality, "Intelligent Design" is just a subterfuge to have a religious concept made part of the school curriculum.

But why is it considered necessary to have this nonsense taught in school? Isn't the access parents have to their children in the hours outside of school sufficient to provide religious indoctrination?

The public schools instruct children for twelve of their first eighteen years of life. Of those twelve years they provide instruction about six hours a day, for half of the days in the year, or a little over thirteen thousand hours available for teaching. Of all those hours of classroom time, about three are spent on teaching evolution. That is a very small proportion of the total instructional package.

In the same twelve years, allowing an average of eight hours sleep a night, parents have their children under their supervision for over fifty-seven thousand waking hours, more than four times as many hours as the schools have.[1]

In these fifty-seven thousand hours, parents who want their children indoctrinated in intelligent design can surely find considerably more than three hours to teach their children all there is to know about this unproven hypothesis. If they cannot do it themselves, there is Sunday school and regular services at their local church, not to mention summer church camp, weekly youth group meetings, bible study, and all the other activities sponsored by various religious organizations. And certainly religious individuals can teach intelligent design to children far better than can the average high school science teacher, who would be attempting to teach something contrary to his or her scientific knowledge.

If a mere three hours of instruction in the public school system on the scientific theory of evolution is going to overturn the alternative teachings of parents and pastors provided over a period of years, then it just demonstrates the worthlessness of that alternative.

Footnote:

  1. This does not include the critical pre-school years where parents have exclusive access to moulding their children's tender minds