Question: Religion is a practice someone chooses to follow, intelligent design is a religious theory hiding under different words. Who gets to decide that religion be taught at a school and not as a choice?
A religion is a practice someone chooses to follow, a religion shouldn't be forced upon a person if they do not believe or want to follow the religion. It is well known that many people believe in Intelligent Design. They like to say that a "designer" is the creater. Who is the designer? Now most people that do not believe in intelligent design would say that the designer is God; the believers dont want to classify the creator as god because then it is a religious view and therefore could not be taught in schools. But because they have changed the words and meanings a bit it could be taught. Who gets to decide that religion be taught at a school not as a choice? Because it is basically religion talking. It is thought that it should not be taught seeing as practicing a religion is a choice.
A religion is a practice someone chooses to follow, a religion shouldn't be forced upon a person if they do not believe or want to follow the religion. It is well known that many people believe in Intelligent Design. They like to say that a "designer" is the creater. Who is the designer? Now most people that do not believe in intelligent design would say that the designer is God; the believers dont want to classify the creator as god because then it is a religious view and therefore could not be taught in schools. But because they have changed the words and meanings a bit it could be taught. Who gets to decide that religion be taught at a school not as a choice? Because it is basically religion talking. It is thought that it should not be taught seeing as practicing a religion is a choice.
The premise of this argument would be that intelligent design is a religious theory hiding under different words. While the conclusion would be that religion is a practice someone chooses to follow.
This would be a Deductive Argument. This is because the premise is true which would mean that the conclusion would have to be true. Which means we have a valid argument. Intelligent Design should not be taught in schools because that would be almost forcing someone to believe a religion that is not what they believe in. Although some people might not agree with Evolution, but unlike intelligent design it has much more evidence that makes sense and can be explained. If someone equates teaching evolution with forced belief I would say to them that the subjects aren't very similar. This is because we have proof of evolution. Some people may not believe in evolution and complain that, that is like forcing them to believe; but its not like they are being lied to. What is being taught is proved and is true. Students in high school choose what they want to believe. Just because its being taught doesn't mean they will believe it. For the reasons above this is why intelligent design (based on religious views) should not be taught in schools.
