I don’t think so, and neither does the author of this article. Here is a snippet:
I’m not sure what’s going on with the Washington Post’s On Faith blog. I would think that a religion blogger for such an important publication as the Post would have a better grasp of the basic tenets of most world religions. And yet, in a post last week, Julia Duin maintained:
“Evolution runs directly counter to most major world religions, which teach that God created the world in some form or another.”
Really? Just off the top of my head I can think of a few major religions that have no trouble reconciling evolution with faith, including Judaism, Catholicism, Buddhism, and all non-fundamentalist versions of Protestantism, such as, for instance, the United Methodist Church.
Duin was writing about a recent study, which I wrote about here, which indicates that one in eight biology teachers are teaching creationism in the classroom. Duin takes a rather sympathetic view to those creationist and intelligent design-spouting teachers and wonders whether it’s fair to make them teach evolution when they don’t accept it. For some reason, Duin leaves out a discussion of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause and the litany of federal court rulings against teaching creationism/intelligent design or banning the teaching of evolution in public school science classes. Specifically, Duin should read the US Supreme Court decision of 1968’s Epperson v. Arkansas, in which the Court ruled that laws banning the teaching of evolution were unconstitutional because they were based solely on a religious view.
Read on. It’s a great article. H/T to James McGrath on Facebook.