I wrote a letter to the college newspaper -- that they published -- to rebuke the dogma of several science professors who attacked the editor for printing a pro-creation article. Here was my conclusion:
Mr. Boulmay's opinion is, in essence, calling-out our faith. He asks whether our nation should expose children to seemingly opposing belief systems. To teach conflicting stories of life's origin may worry children and needlessly fester anxiety. I suggest a scientific resolution to the question: conduct an experiment! One experimental group of children would be exposed to only scientific theories, and the hypothesis would predict this group develops adults of the "enlightened minority", a numinous entity that the professors appear to have exclusive membership.
I tend to agree with Plato's remark on who should determine the kind of education to provide our future citizens. He concluded, "We shall persuade mothers and nurses to tell our chosen stories to their children, and by means of them to mould their minds." (The Republic) If citizens decide that children should be taught creationism, like a story told by parents, then teachers, being agents of the state, must follow the democratic voice. This nation's devotion to majority rule, as compelled on teachers, presents an overlooked quandary to Mr. Boulmay's opinion.
As a future science teacher, I answer the professors' question, "Can hundreds of thousands of scientists [...] be wrong?" with a firm “Yes”, that the possibility exists for scientists to err inasmuch as it does fundamentalists.