In “Impact of a Short Evolution Module on Students' Perceived Conflict Between Religion and Evolution” (ABT 79 [2]: 104–111), the authors describe how they taught part of an introductory biology course at a public university to show that evolution and religion are potentially compatible. The authors justified this approach is by claiming it “could affect how some students feel in biology courses.” The authors even brought in a “devout” Catholic to show students that evolution and religion do not necessarily conflict. Isn't this approach—that is, explicitly claiming that evolution and religion are potentially compatible—just as biased as teaching that evolution and religion are potentially incompatible?

The authors then suggest that biology teachers share their personal experiences about reconciling science and religion. Isn't this just as biased as recommending that biology teachers share their personal experiences about evolution and religion being irreconcilable?

Finally, the authors suggest that teachers have students read a book reconciling evangelical Christianity with evolution. Isn't this just as biased as recommending that students read a book that argues that evolution and evangelical Christianity are incompatible? Why should biologists at a public university be apologists for any religion?