I'm capable or setting my own side of the debate and my position. I don't need you to present it for me, taking it to some unreasonable extreme. This is a sophomoric - and fallacious - debating tactic. It would not score you points in a debate class and I am quite certain those on here are more than capable of seeing through it.
Back to our discussion, just what do you find so hard to understand? I am for fully presenting the issue on the origins of life. Now, if I can presume what your position is, you seem to be saying that only one view - the one you happen to agree with - is the only one that is legitimate and should be presented, this on the based on your belief that science only supports your view and none other. Is this correct?
And can I ask you, have you ever researched to see if any credentialed scientist disagrees with you, that based on their learning and study they have come to the conclusion life was created by a god?
That would be an interesting pursuit of additional knowledge on this subject, don't you think? Heck, we could modify our lesson plan to not only talk about evolution, creationism (Hopi, Moslem, Celtic), we could even draw into the debate those scientists that agree with one position or another.
There is only one scientific view. Others are religious and do not belong in science classes.
It doesn't matter if EVERY learned, credentialed scientist believes that God created the universe, the earth and all life on it. That idea is still not science. Please do not confuse the personal beliefs of scientists with the theories of science. Even if all scientists believed in creationism, the theory of evolution would still be the only scientific theory that explained the diversity of life (or there would be no scientific theory, as was the case pre-Darwin.)