Should creationism be taught in schools?

Creationism and evolution aren’t mutually exclusive

Question: Should creationism be taught in schools?
Position1 of 3›: Yes, creationism should be taught in schools
Argument1 of 3›: Creationism and evolution aren’t mutually exclusive

Both creationism and evolution can be taught in schools.

The argument

Some people, called Old Earth creationists, believe that God, or some other higher power, played a part in the events that led to our creation. But they do not disagree with mainstream science — in fact, they openly embrace it. Their position is that the scientific account describes how the world came to be as it is, while the religious account addresses why there is anything at all, and that these are different questions rather than rival answers to the same one. The history of science supports the compatibility. It was Priest Father Monseigneur Lemaitre (b. 1894) who came up with the idea of the Big Bang — the cornerstone of modern cosmology, proposed by a clergyman, which is difficult to reconcile with the claim that religious commitment is inherently hostile to scientific enquiry. Old Earth creationists do not argue that creation was one event that happened in six days, but that it occurred over millennia, and that the "days" in the Bible were in no way literal. Once the text is not read as a chronology, the supposed conflict with geology and cosmology simply does not arise. Evolution and science do not prove or disprove God's existence. They describe mechanisms; they are silent on whether anything lies behind those mechanisms, because that is not the kind of claim their methods can test. Many scientists are religious and comfortably hold both beliefs, which is the practical demonstration that the two are not mutually exclusive. So evolution can be taught without threatening religious sensibilities, and creationism can be taught without displacing evolution. Very few English creationists believe in a young earth: this is partly because most are Muslims, and Muslim creationism has no strong attachment to a literal reading of the Bible story. The version of creationism that actually conflicts with science is therefore a minority position even among creationists, which removes the main objection to teaching creationism in schools.

Premises

[P1]Old Earth creationism accepts mainstream science, including the Big Bang and an ancient universe, treating the biblical 'days' as non-literal. [P2] Evolution and science neither prove nor disprove God's existence, and many scientists comfortably hold both religious and scientific beliefs. [P3] Because creationism (in its mainstream forms) and evolution are compatible, teaching one need not threaten the other. [C] Therefore, creationism can be taught in schools alongside evolution without conflict.

Counter-arguments

The earth was created in 6 days - creationism and evolution are mutually exclusive.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] The earth was created in 6 days.