In this thread I propose to discuss why "creationism" in general, and "Young Earth Creationism (YEC)" in particular are BAD for the US.
There are differing opinions among U.S. residents concerning what they would like to see the U.S. do, or become. So there would be differing opinions on what could be "bad" for the U.S.
Reason #1: It interferes with the proper education of young people, both in terms of rational thinking and in terms of scientific literacy.
Your opening statement only seeks to further eliminate
something from education. Shouldn't education be about teaching students how to think, not what to think? By teaching them a broad spectrum of an issue, even the controversial ones? The creation issue was involved in science education at least somewhat more 50 years ago than it has been in the last couple of decades. The U.S. government is having a much harder time paying its bills now than it was 50 years ago.
The U.S didn't become what it is today, either by accident, or by a scientific knowledge that was superior to the rest of the world. It became what it is largely because of a whole host of knowledge, (history of human nature, desire of personal liberty, etc.) all of which had little or nothing to do with science. What the U.S. has accomplished up to now, is largely taken for granted, both within and without the U.S.
Reason #2: It interferes with the supposedly informed behavior of elected officials, at the local, state and national levels, both in terms of rational thinking and in terms of scientific literacy.
Interferes? Liberty and limited government are built around the concept "endowed by their creator".
Anyone who claims to believe otherwise is, to borrow from Dawkin's, either
[snipped childish drivel from Dawkins]
Dawkins isn't from the U.S. Though he does seem to increasingly be the premier spokesman for the three things that this O/P of yours is about; scientific study, militant atheism, and extreme political liberalism.
It seems rather obvious to me that any teaching in schools that is based on stupid, ignorant, misinformed, deluded, insane or malicious information is bad education, leading to misinformed or deluded students at best.
But it also should be obvious to you that the U.S. was at least partially FOUNDED on what Dawkins goes into childish rants about. I would hope that would make it obvious to many that Dawkins opinions on U.S. politics mean absolutely nothing.
Symptomatic of this in the US is the degree of Climate Change Denial by members of congress, based on false beliefs that are interfering with rational action regarding this pending massive change to the world as a whole.
There are climate scientists all over the world who disagree with the atheist, liberal view of global warming, and have written articles and books about it. It's not good for the U.S. to shield students from these other points of view. Even if students are indoctrinated with only the correct conclusions on current issues, hearing only one side does nothing to prepare future adults to think for themselves on issues that will be important to U.S. survival that will be prominent later in U.S. existence.
Perhaps there should be a scientific literacy test for government representatives ...
Or perhaps a history
lesson, not only for government representatives, but for politically militant members of the scientific community.