Posted on 01/07/2005 2:42:22 PM PST by Ed Current
The "creation" controversy has splashed down in Gull Lake, Mich. Last spring, according to the Kalamazoo Gazette, a parent complained that two middle school biology teachers were giving the concept of "intelligent design" equal treatment in the classroom with the theory of evolution. The district has told them to stop, and both are now crying foul, appealing to the community for help.
Gull Lake parents are divided.
"Intelligent design," or ID, contends that the diversity of life on Earth and the complexity of some biological systems could not have arisen by means of evolution. To correct that perceived inadequacy, ID stipulates that an "intelligent designer" authored the world’s species.
Proponents argue that intelligent design is a serious scientific theory, and that, at the very least, its existence should be taught in biology classes. Opponents dismiss it as a superficially secular attempt to inject biblical creationism into public school classrooms – a Lamb of God in sheep’s clothing.
Michigan isn’t alone. All told, roughly 40 states are now embroiled in battles over the teaching of evolution. On Tuesday, the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups filed a lawsuit on behalf of Pennsylvania parents objecting to their school board’s decision to teach ID. Eugenie C. Scott of the National Center for Science Education told the Gazette that "by lobbying school boards to include creationism or weaken evolution in their science curricula, (biblical) creationists are politicizing science education."
But Ms. Scott understates the problem — and mislays the blame.
Every aspect of the public school curriculum, not just science education, is inherently political. Decisions over what and how to teach are made by elected and appointed government officials. Because there is only one official state organ of education, everyone wants it to conform to their own views.
That is impossible.
In a pluralistic society, there are countless different and incompatible worldviews. Our effort to serve that diverse audience through a monolithic school system has not only failed to forge common ground; it has bred animosity and discord.
But this failure of compelled conformity is no cause for alarm; it is unnecessary to force all Americans to accept a single view on the origins of man. While there are certainly issues on which consensus is important in a free society, such as a commitment to the democratic process, respect for the rule of law and equal rights for all citizens, the origin of humanity is not among them.
Nor is it clear that centrally planned public schooling is the best means of nurturing societal agreement in those special areas where it is important. Research shows private school students to be as tolerant and civic-minded as their public school counterparts, and it also shows private schools to be, if anything, more meaningfully integrated than public schools.
Private schools, with their diverse world views, coexist as peacefully as private churches. If every family in America had the financial resources to choose the public or private school they preferred, as they would under a universal education tax credit system, we could enjoy the same harmonious relations in education that we have experienced in the field of religion. Thanks to the separation of church and state, American religious life has avoided most of the political and ideological conflicts that have beset our official state schools.
And honestly, is anyone happy with the way schools currently handle this issue?
Adherents of intelligent design presumably aren’t. They must fight to have their views heard in the public schools, and when they succeed, they immediately face legal challenges. Even if ID prevails in court (as biblical creationism did not), will science teachers present it in a way that will satisfy its advocates?
Adherents of evolution have nothing to cheer about, either. Virtually all biologists see evolution as the fundamental structuring principle of their entire discipline. By contrast, schools often teach it as a brief, isolated unit to avoid controversy. Tellingly, after generations of public school instruction in the theory of evolution, a recent Gallup poll found that 45 percent of Americans believe humanity is the comparatively recent product of divine creation, while only one-third believe that evolution is a theory well-supported by scientific evidence.
These results must dismay most scientists, and they should cause intelligent design advocates to question the wisdom of entrusting their own views to the public schools.
Back in Gull Lake, both sides are digging in their heels, and accusations of miseducation and brainwashing have started to fly. So long as we stick with a single official state school system, however, there will always be ideological winners and losers, and such antagonism will remain.
Wouldn’t we all be better off giving school choice a chance instead?
#####
Andrew J. Coulson is senior fellow for education policy for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a research and educational institute headquartered in Midland, Mich. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided that the author and the Center are properly cited.
Legendary Placemarker
Thanks for the ping!
Don't be so typically absurd. Nobody believes every evolutionist is an atheist. True, the majority of FR's rabid evolutionists are admitted atheists yet somehow you feel that is a badge of shame (and it is). It is equally true that the underlying belief systems of the atheistic evolutionists contradict our Founders and conservatism in general.
Do you deny that you are an atheist?
BTW Big Bang makes testable predictions which have been verified.
I've got no problem with religion or people being religious but, why are these people insisting that religion be taught in science class? If people don't want their children to learn science, they should either pull them out of school or take other courses but, it's ridiculous to insist that science class teach creation myths.
Because the poofists erroneously believe that the most obvious explanation for observed genetic mechanisms, biologic similarities, and fossil trends contradicts the existence of their god. To come up with their alternative theory they simply toss out the most ubiquitous observation--space-time continuity. The doctrine persists despite is absurdity through cultish techniques like, "you will go to Hell if you don't believe what we believe."
It could make education a lot more straight forward though. In addition to science, you could interject religion into mathematics, and everything else. Then when it comes to final exam time you only need to know 4 answers:
Q: Where did it come from?
A: God made it.
Q: How did it happen?
A: He willed it.
Q: Why did He will it?
A: He works in mysterious ways.
Q: How do you know?
A: I let Him into my heart.
Learning is a piece of cake.
Q: How did it happen?
A: EVOLUTION willed it.
Q: Why did He will it?
A: EVOLUTION works in mysterious ways.
Q: How do you know?
A: I let EVOLUTION into my heart.
EVOLUTION is a BLIND LEAP OF FAITH.
Personification of evolution?
A: EVOLUTION works in mysterious ways.
Hardly mysterious. You might start with an introductory level biology text.
A: I let EVOLUTION into my heart.
Of course scientists are more interested in the weight of evidence. Very funny though.
EVOLUTION is a BLIND LEAP OF FAITH.
Only for those ignorant of the evidence. No, evolution is a rational explanation for what is observed. The evidence is so overwhelming, that it is difficult (although not impossible) to imagine that evolution does not take place.
Is your passion against evolution reactive, or do you think if you open your mind you will go to Hell? You really think evolution isn't a reasonable explanation for what is observed in biology?
The universe and life do exist and therefore have an explanation. It is natural to speculate about them. It is rational to try to explain them by mechanisms that we know exist. That is not faith, it is reason.
Speculation and faith are often similar in their validity, but quite different in the feeling of certainty that they impart.
Case is anything not understood about evolution will be argued in all the intricacies by evolutionsts with enthusiasm. They have journals (and feuds - the disagreement between Leaky and Johanson is legendary.)
OTOH Morris and Gish totally disgree about the nature of Peking Man. But they can share the corridors of ICR without ever coming to near-blows. Are they better people? No, they just don't really care about the matter.
It a Creat gets into what is analogus to an intellectual conundrum to homo Sapiens Sapiens they fall back on one of the four defences beavus noted
A: God made it.
A: He willed it.
A: He works in mysterious ways.
A: I let Him into my heart.
When it comes time for the final exam, there will be only one question and one answer.
You better hope the question isn't "Is poofism true?" or you are likely to find Heaven populated by evolutionists.
So then you admit to lying when you label every evolutionist such?
Well, that was relatively easy. You should be this forthcoming all the time.
How would school vouchers end the war?
Won't voucher-accepting-schools need to be accredited the way private schools are now?
The same evolutionists who are upset with IDers in the public schools will be upset with IDers in accredited schools... and the same IDers pushing for ID in public schools will argue that schools who only present evolution are inferior.
Vouchers may shift responsibility for the bloodshed... but they won't end the war. I think the real end to the war is to quit pushing for creationism or ID to be taught in science classrooms. After all... the best scientific explanation for why it rained this morning is not "God willed it". While in truth, God may have indeed willed it (He works in mysterious ways... ;)), but that explanation is and should be entirely irrelevant in a class on meteorology.
Instead of trying to teach God in science class, we should push for stickers like the ones in Cobb County. We should test our kids on both the evidence for and the evidence against evolution... without making the absurd claim that evidence against evolution is evidence for God.
Well bless your heart for trying.
Everyone's entitled to his opinion.
bloodshed
It's not that kind of war. Let's keep things in perspective. I don't mind calling a poofist a poofist and ridiculing his nonsense, but I have no intention of cutting him. He!!, I don't even want to tax him to pay for teaching evolution. Live & let live. Goofy people are part of the human condition and part of what makes it interesting.
I think the real end to the war is to quit pushing for creationism or ID to be taught in science classrooms.
That's what the poofists would call defeat. So you think an unconditional surrender is the real way to end the war?
we should push for stickers like the ones in Cobb County
Those stickers are absurd. It is the job of science teachers to teach that kind of skepticism for everything. You can put the sticker over the science classroom door, but there is nothing unusual with evolutionary science that merits such special recognition.
without making the absurd claim that evidence against evolution is evidence for God.
God is the primary, and is impervious to evidence. All evidence is interpreted in the context of that primary.
My offer still stands - let me know when I should bring your posts out for a closer examination, so that we might know just how civil the self-proclaimed guardians of civility are.
If I remember this guy correctly, this is the point where he disappears.
It's time for coffee.
That is not your original offer. Your original offer is in post # 35:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.