[metmom]

What you are not free to do, however, is to require public schools to instruct children in your own religious beliefs or to prevent public schools from teaching science that conflicts with your own religious beliefs. That's why the theory is evolution and modern astronomy should be taught in public schools, and why creationis/ID and astrology should not.

But the teaching of evolution in public schools is teaching religious beliefs. Evolution is the creation account of the secular humanist and atheist. It does not belong in the public schools either. Calling it science to make it sound more legitimate and make it more palatable for the general public does nothing to disguise the fact that it is pushing a worldview on the children, one diametrically opposed to what most people in this world believe.

Science has not actually disproved the creation account in Scripture. It's merely offering its own naturalistic, no God allowed version on how life arose on this planet, and that falls into the realm of philosophy.

Science has not yet begun to provide enough support to origins to even give it serious consideration, and the evidence for the ToE is circumstantial and forensic, not the scientific method.

There is no legitimate way to equate creation and astrology without it being an attack on Christianity.

[Bosh Flimshaw]

But the teaching of evolution in public schools is teaching religious beliefs. Evolution is the creation account of the secular humanist and atheist.i>

There are so many problems with your statement that is is difficult to know where to begin. First, simply because a scientific theory (like the theory of evolution) conflicts with *your* religious belief, it does not follow that it is itself a religious belief. Further, simply because a legitimate scientific relies upon natural explanation for natural phenomena (as opposed to a supernatural cause), it does not follow that it is a "secular humanist and atheist" theory.

For example, modern germ theory is not a religious belief, even though it is in direct conflict with some religious beliefs that illness is caused by demonic possession. Although it does not rely upon supernatural explanation for natural phenomena, it is silly to refer to it as a "secular humanist and atheist" theory.

Science has not actually disproved the creation account in Scripture.

Well, I don't know how literally you are interpreting the creation account in Genesis, but the fields of astronomy, physics, biology, cosmology, geology, and archeology all indicate *very* strongly that the earth and universe were not "created" in six literal days approximately six thousand years ago. I do not say this to try to convince you to abandon any religiously inspired belief you may have, but merely to point out that there are certainly aspects of some religions' creation stories that stand in pretty direct opposition to what we can observe.

There is no legitimate way to equate creation and astrology without it being an attack on Christianity.

I do not seek to equate Christianity with astrology. I am pointing out that there is no intellectually consistent position that would allow the non-science of creationism/ID to be taught as "science" in public schools while denying astrology the same position. If you can formulate such a position, I would be eager to hear it.