Evolution creationism and intelligent design essay

Introduction

Human beings have always had a profound desire to know their roots. This desire expresses itself as a deep longing to understand how the universe came to be, in particular, the origin of living things. There have been numerous models and theories that attempt to explain how life came to exist, however, most of these theories are marred with controversies from different groups of people such as, scholars, religious groups and from the general populace. The evolution, creation and intelligent designs are three distinct models that seek to explain the mystery of origin of life. The evolutionists normally argue that life evolved and continues to do so through natural selection, while the supporters of intelligent design are of the opinion that life was created by deities. Nonetheless, the creationism is more of a religious myth that opposes the evolution theory by focusing on defending some sacred texts. However, some critics of scientific theories that inquire about the origin of life usually push for the education systems to scrap out the teaching of scientific theories to students due to various reasons that I will discuss later. In this paper, I will put across my thoughts on to what extent parents and School boards should have the right to decide what scientific theories explaining the origin of life are presented in schools.
Over the years, there have been intense conflicts between creationist and evolutionist proponents. Young-Earth creationist who believes in the biblical explanation of origin of life has on numerous occasions been at loggerheads with the scientific explanations and evidences presented by Charles Darwin through his evolution theory. They have been pushing for the introduction of their religious explanation into the US school syllabus so as creationism would be taught alongside the evolution theory, unfortunately the US constitution to impose religious beliefs in public schools. Therefore, it is illegal to teach creationism in public schools as part of the science curriculum. This setback to these young–Earth creations led them to develop an extension of creationism in the guise of intelligent design. The intelligent design (ID) asserts that life on earth came about as a result of the actions of an intelligent designer. The designer does not necessarily have to be God but through their explanations, this designer seems to be God. Therefore, I think that the best thing Parents and school boards should do is to cease from interfering with the school syllabus, they should not let their religious beliefs, which mostly depends on faith and lack scientific evidence, to influence their decision on what the students should and should not be taught in school. From my own perception, I think creationism should not be given any special consideration especially when it tries to compete with scientific proven models and theories, which are supported by concrete evidence.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the dispute between the evolution theory, creationism and the intelligent design seems not to end any time soon. Each side usually brings up logical arguments that make neither of the side to admit defeat. While the evolutionist claims that, the intelligent design and creationists are more of religious and philosophical in nature rather than being scientific the creationists and intelligent design on the other hand claims that the evolutionists often refuse to acknowledge that life appears to be designed. Controversies on whether intelligent design should be taught in schools are still persistent. Evolutionists agree that there is no problem with intelligent design being taught in the US schools provided it is not taught under biology or the science field in general but intelligent design’s proponents insists on making it to be studied under biology. However, I still believe that parents and school boards should leave these arguments to the courts to decide rather than appearing to side or to incite due to their stands on whether these scientific theories should or should not be included in the syllabus.