[Anti-MSM]

1) ALL theories in science are unproven.

2) Evolution IS a fact(common descent); the Theory of Evolution is a description of how evolution happened.

That's my point, though. If it's theory, then why don't they allow competing theories about how the world became what it is today. Are there any competing views taught?

In economics, we learn, to name a few, supply-side, Keynesian, and central control/Marxist economic models.

I'm ok with the teaching of evolution as a theory, but the secularists are clearly trying to teach it as fact.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

If it's theory, then why don't they allow competing theories about how the world became what it is today.

Because there aren't any scientific ones.

There are plenty of creation myths that could be taught. But this shouldn't be the biology curriculum.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"That's my point, though. If it's theory, then why don't they allow competing theories about how the world became what it is today."

ID isn't a competing theory. It's a philosophical position, not a scientific one. Science class should only have scientific theories.

[10mm]

"Theories" are either supported or disproven by "Facts". Show me a sunflower with "This sunflower created by God - All rights reserved" encoded in it's DNA, then ID would have a scientific leg on which to stand.

If a theory were "proven", it wouldn't be a theory. It would be an axiom.

[staytrue]

why don't they allow competing theories about how the world became what it is today.

All competing theories are welcome except the ones that say "god did it" QED.

That is religion and not science.