WHOSE science implies that God does not exist?
A friend points to an interesting question raised by committed Darwinist Michael Ruse (From a Curriculum Standpoint, Is Science Religion? Chronicle of Higher Education
December 22, 2010):
But now ask yourself. If “God exists” is a religious claim (and it surely is), why then is “God does not exist” not a religious claim?Now, at first glance, the answer seems pretty obvious: If "science" really implies that, it could only be taught as an optional philosophy area, not as a core curriculum subject. Darwinists know best whether what they mean by science means that and, in most cases, the answer is probably yes.
And if Creationism implies God exists and cannot therefore be taught, why then should science which implies God does not exist be taught?