We don't go to church and learn about bugs???...This is America and that just might be happening some place in the US. Maybe your town.

We have...
# The right to seek information and ideas;
# The right to receive information and ideas;
# The right to impart information and ideas.

If this is something they can do in their town let them...I'm sure it will not block the Elephants from getting a hand full of peanuts from children...

Personally I wouldn't add anything other than Animal information at any Zoo especially religion information.

A statue of Ganesh, an elephant Hindu Deity
Permalink | Report

Does the Tulsa Zoo currently have exhibits on 'Evolution'?

Then why should they start inserting creationism in with basic zoology?

Why doesn't Tulsa just make another 'Bible Land' theme park and add in a Noah's Anipals section and leave the zoo alone?
http://www.holylandexperience.com/

If Anna Falling has her way, I can see them packing up and shipping out all the creatures that have been around prior to the creation of the world, and they just wouldn't fit in.

Bye bye crocks and alligators. You have been around long before Christians created the earth and haven't even bothered to change yourselves much, evolution wise.
(would that make Steve Irwin the anti-christ?)
Permalink | Report

If you're going to bring creationism into a place of science and logic, like a zoo, you're probably obligated to bring in a range of mythology and other religious beliefs about where animals come from.

I wouldn't be opposed to a section of the zoo that said "Religions of the world and where they believe animals came from" and then listed where a dozen different belief system came from.

That being said, you can't really put evolution and christian creationism next two each other as one is science and one is faith/religion (or nonsense based on what some people think).

The general problem we're having as a society with this issue is that many of the creationists believe that their belief system is in conflict with science. It is, however, possible or someone to be religious and believe God created man and animals while still believing that evolution exists.

of course, this thread will probably devolve into a firestorm by people on either side trying to convince the other that their beliefs are invalid. Both belief systems and be valid while not negating the other.
Permalink | Report

Well to begin, i have to say that i am a creationist so im definitely biased. However, if the zoo is government funded then i would say no to having a creationism exhibit unless other religious exhibits are also displayed. If the zoo is privately owned then obviously it is up to the owner to display exhibits. I do think however that a zoo would be a good place for a creationism exhibit if possible.
Permalink | Report

The zoo should definitely not create an exhibit based on Christian creationism or any other type of creationism. The zoo is a public entity and should not introduce any religious opinions into their displays or exhibits.

I'm also of the opinion that the belief that we all crawled out of the primordial soup shouldn't be put forth as fact at the zoo. Macroevolution, or changing from one species to another, is not universally accepted as science and doesn't stand up to a true scientific test.

Microevolution, or changes within a species is something that has been observed and its theories and possibilities should be discussed. It makes the exhibits much richer to understand that the wingless flies living out on a rock in the ocean have been able to survive because they didn't have fully formed wings and over generations this "inability to fly" trait has been bred into these insects.

Why is a giraffe's neck so long? Is it because of microevolution in the giraffe's ancestors that allowed those creatures that were able to reach the higher leaves to survive? Or is it because that is the way God created them? I don't know. How about the zebra, whose stripes allow the herd to blend in with each other and mask the number of animals in the group? Created that way or evolved?

I believe the exhibits don't have to address the origin of the unique traits that each animal has. The traits should be discussed but whether the animals where created that way or whether the primordial soup kicked off their evolution to their current state should not.

Science is our understanding of the world based on observation and experimentation and while the scientific method is a sound principle, our understanding of the facts of our universe is not. We will continue to learn and understand more as the years go by. Some of the facts we now know will be determined incorrect, including some of the scientific information we believe we understand today.
Permalink | Report

I have never been to a zoo with an exhibit on either creationism OR evolution. A zoo is a place where a young child is taken to be awe-inspired by the exotic animals and learn about their habits and behavior and other interesting facts about the various species.

So, no, I would say a zoo is not the place for either type of exhibit. I can see why she wants the exhibit put there, however, because zoos are usually frequented by those with very young elementary school age children. She wants to get creationism engrained in their minds before they grow up and become too scientific-minded.
Permalink | Report