Teach people how to think critically. You can't teach atheism.

Teach about carbon dating. Teach about the scientific method. Teach about facts and how to differentiate between facts and fiction. They will come to their own conclusions.

No, just as religion should not be. What should be taught is the right of each and every person to decide for himself or herself, using sound evidence and solid reasoning, what her or she believes -- providing that he or she is willing to be responsible for the consequences of acting on those beliefs.

A-theism is: "disbelief OR lack of belief [non-belief] in the existence of God or gods". That is ALL it is and nothing more. Now A-theists are a mix bag of everything you can imagine. God(s) is not one of them.

Teach atheism? Seems to me to be a silly idea. What would the curriculum consist of? It's akin to teaching non-stamp collecting.

science should be taught. If a teacher is telling his kids it isn't true, he should be prosecuted.

No, atheism isn't a thing. You can teach religion or the avoidance of reality. How do you teach the avoidance of the avoidance of reality?

Atheism is common sense and logical thinking .I don’t think this can be taught to anyone

Nope. Teach how to think. Atheism will result.

I like the idea of children debating ideas and the type of universe that we live in should be one of the subjects up for debate. Not so much teaching athiesm, but teaching children to back up their argument with ecidence

Sure...it is when evolution is taught.

I believe that there should be a religions class that discusses all religions equally. As for science classes, I believe that they should be taught as mine was. I live in the Bible Belt so I was expecting atheistic theories to be immediately dismissed, but the way my biology teacher explained it was that religion and science are two separate things that exist almost completely outside of each other. Science is simply people trying to explain how things happen without divine or supernatural intervention. We know that evolution exists because it has been proven. We see adaptations often, which is a form of evolution. So, in essence, we study science to try and understand how it MIGHT have happened. Whether we choose to believe in that or a deity is completely and totally up to us, and studying science does not effect our personal religious beliefs.

What is there to teach about atheism? That's teaching negative space.

I don't think it's the schools job to teach beliefs of any kind. That's the job of the parent. Schools should be for the purpose of learning facts and how to use those facts. Atheism or Religion it doesn't matter to me. That should be left for the parents and not the schools.

I don't think so... You could teach general religion in schools, and let kids derive from that the function of religions so they learn they're bullshit. But as far as actually trying to teach a captive audience that god doesn't exist, I think that oversteps the bounds a little. By all means though teach things that refute religious dogmas. Evolution, geology, astronomy, even history can all contradict bible stories.

I'm not sure how you would teach non-belief of something.

No, I don't think it should be taught. What should be taught starting in Kindergarten is critical thinking skills. Not enough of that happening.

Anyone that teaches creationism should be arrested! I am UK and find it totally shocking.
Yes, atheism (for want of a better name) should be taught but not as a religion!
I pay to send my children to a secular school for good reason and they are doing very well lolz.

Well atheism is such a broad term we could never teach atheism because atheist have very many different beliefs I believe that we should teach the kids science I believe we should teach the kids Evolution how we believe the Earth was created ect religion I believe has no business being in public schools religion is something that should be taken place privately in our houses or other places of gather where other people share the same beliefs

you can't "teach" a non believe, except that teaching one believe automatically implies non believe in the rest

Yes I agree. It would be great to believe in the religion we had from birth. Butt science has moved on. ALL WE WANT. IS. THE TRUTH.
James

I wish young people were taught about the factual history of religions, like any history course. But you would never get an approved curriculum on that. None of the parties would ever agree. From my experience, the more people, both young and older, know about the real history of religions, the more likely they are to see through the claims of religions.

Creationism isn't really what's being taught in those terrible cases. The real message is submission to authority. Creationism is sort of the "carrier wave" of the signal (to borrow a metaphor from radio broadcast technology). Those teachers want the students to do as their told and not question.
Atheism is a claim of certainty. Science isn't really big on certainties.
Science comes from an agnostic perspective. "We don't know (fact X). Let's think carefully about what we DO know for sure (based on existing evidence), conduct an experiment, think about what we observed, and figure out what the new information tells us".
The existence of god is not a falsifiable proposition. You can't prove or disprove god, any more than you can prove or disprove altruism, or someone else's true happiness.
Since you can't prove or disprove god, any conversation about the existence of god in a scientific context is a waste of time. Better to spend the class time talking about trigonometry, or animal behavior, or music theory.

Hard to control what teachers imply while teaching anything. I used to hear teachers making violent political attacks as I passed their classrooms, when I was teaching at a community college in eastern KY.

It would be ideal to present all theories to kids, tell them which ones are currently endorsed by scientists, and why, and also mention the various religious creation stories as well, presented as "this is what such-and-such a religion teaches," without comment.

I am skeptical of all it, leaning more toward Lloyd Pye's "Intervention Theory Essentials" ideas. Makes sense, and also agrees with what the Deep State whistle blowers have been saying for decades.
I've watched the documentary "Unacknowledged" on YouTube and Netflix, and seen enough wierd stuff myself to be suspicious of US government cover ups.