Evolutionist theory rests entirely upon a presupposition that life is an Immaculate Conception.
Think about that one for a minute...
The "origin of species" is rooted in the idea of a singularity: the mechanics of the DNA molecule. All species of Terran life has it. Like the singularity of the "Big Bang" theory, the two are categorically inseparable as immaculate conceptions. It only takes a mere application of logic.
The perplexing question of human origin from a common ancestor to apes is even more problematic. According to evolutionary theory, humans (Homo sapiens) did not descend from apes, but from some "missing link."
Although Dr. Louis Leaky spent decades searching and found Zinjanthropus and Homo habilis, Olduvai Gorge gave no answers. Logic also suggests in order to "descend," there has to be something you descend "from" and something you ascend "to."
Evolutionary theory rooted in the universal human dissatisfaction for mortality is a vain search for human origin(s), an attempt to rationalize a yearning for connection to something eternal.
Now, since nobody knows the answers, it is only scientific method to consider all points of view on the issue in education. To do otherwise would be like students dancing around totems, with professors as witch doctors proclaiming intellectual taboos and making sacrifices.
This is far worse than what the ersatz secularists accuse the creationists of doing!
Evolutionist theory rests entirely upon a presupposition that life is an Immaculate Conception.
No it doesn't. The TOE does not address the origin of life. And I'm sure you've had that pointed out to you before.
But don't let that stop you from rambling on as if it did.
This is a ridiculous statement. A lot of points of view have been discarded from science long ago--they simply did not meet the standards. When you go to a hotel and get your key, do you check each and every door, or do you let past experience and logic guide you to the proper one?
(And nowadays dancing around totems is usually restricted to Friday nights. Not like the good old days! Why, I could tell you tales of grad school... )
All points of view? Really? Regardless of their objective standing as active and productive scientific ideas? What does that mean for standards of intellectual honesty and academic integrity? How would you prevent such rampant intellectual relativism from spreading to all scientific theory, and (further) infecting all educational topics?
For instance nobody "knows" (by the strict criteria your comments suggest) which culture is really best, or that one is better than another. Therefore freewheeling, anti-Western, relativist multiculturalism is justified?