[Marie2]

In our home school I teach my kids what evolution is, often using the evolution scientist’s own writings, so that they have an antithesis to our thesis that creation science is correct.

Having been raised to believe in evolution I have no qualms discussing its main teachings as well as contrasting it to the creationist view.

Evolutionists, in general, do not seem to share the same confidence and refuse to even mention the main creation science teachings, even if only critically.

[Clemenza]

Just because a majority of the sheeple think that a fairy tale should be taught in science class doesn't make it right.

Keep your bibles in theology class, please.

There, I said it. This is the main issue (actually the only at this point) issue that divides me from Xians.

[whattajoke]

Evolutionists, in general, do not seem to share the same confidence and refuse to even mention the main creation science teachings, even if only critically.

Interestingly, chemistry teachers also usually fail to mention alchemy and geologists have also discarded the flat earth notion. Am I to understand you have a problem with this as well?

[ColdWater]

the main creation science teachings

As far as I understand, the 'main creation science' is as written in the Bible in Genesis. That doesn't classify as science class material.

[oldmanreedy]

"In our home school I teach my kids what evolution is, often using the evolution scientist’s own writings, so that they have an antithesis to our thesis that creation science is correct."

Interesting. Which "evolution scientist[s]" do you use, and what writings of theirs do you incorporate into your lessons?