Good for them. One in five Americans believe that the lottery is the most practical way of attaining personal wealth.
Should their views be considered when teaching economics?
Cite?
"One in five Americans believe that the lottery is the most practical way of attaining personal wealth. "
I think they meant that 1 of 5 Americans think the lottery is the EASIEST way of attaining wealth, which it probably is, aside from inheriting it, which wont even cost you a dollar to buy the lottery ticket.
If most of the people support I.D. being taught in classrooms, then it should be taught, because it is the PEOPLE who's taxes keep the schools functioning.
Should their views be considered when teaching economics?
Should they not?
They already are. Lotteries are shamelessly promoted with public funds on TV, in schools, and on billboards.
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!
Should their views be considered when teaching economics?
Who's money is it?
Who's money pays for the teaching?
I don't think that 69 percent want intelligent design taught. They would like to know what other theories are out there. So would I.
If somebody can come up with something that holds together better under study, makes more sense, and explains what we see around us half so well as evolution/Darwinism -- I say, bring it on!
It's posts like yours that create suspicion against so-called scientific theories.