Posted on 01/19/2005 8:52:24 AM PST by FeeinTennessee
Pa. Students Learn 'Intelligent Design' By MARTHA RAFFAELE The Associated Press
HARRISBURG, Pa. - High school students heard about "intelligent design" for the first time Tuesday in a school district that attracted national attention by requiring students to be made aware of it as an alternative to the theory of evolution.
Administrators in the Dover Area School District read a statement to three biology classes Tuesday and were expected to read it to other classes on Wednesday, according to a statement from the Thomas More Law Center in Ann Arbor, Mich., which was speaking on the district's behalf.
The district is believed to be the only one in the nation to require students to hear about intelligent design - a concept that holds that the universe is so complex, it had to be created by an unspecified guiding force.
"The revolution in evolution has begun," said Richard Thompson, the law center's president and chief counsel. "This is the first step in which students will be given an honest scientific evaluation of the theory of evolution and its problems."
The case represents the newest chapter in a history of evolution lawsuits dating back to the Scopes Monkey Trial in Tennessee nearly 80 years ago. In Georgia, a suburban Atlanta school district plans to challenge a federal judge's order to remove stickers in science textbooks that call evolution "a theory, not a fact."
The law center is defending the Dover district against a federal lawsuit filed on behalf of eight families by two civil-liberties groups that alleged intelligent design is merely a secular variation of creationism, the biblical-based view that regards God as the creator of life. They maintain that the Dover district's curriculum mandate may violate the constitutional separation of church and state.
"Students who sat in the classroom were taught material which is religious in content, not scientific, and I think it's unfortunate that has occurred," said Eric Rothschild, a Philadelphia attorney representing the plaintiffs in the federal lawsuit.
Biology teacher Jennifer Miller said although she was able to make a smooth transition to her evolution lesson after the statement was read, some students were upset that administrators would not entertain any questions about intelligent design.
"They were told that if you have any questions, to take it home," Miller said.
The district allowed students whose parents objected to the policy to be excused from hearing the statement at the beginning of class and science teachers who opposed the requirement to be exempted from reading the statement. About 15 of 170 ninth-graders asked to be excused from class, Thompson said.
A federal judge has scheduled a trial in the lawsuit for Sept. 26.
---
Dover Area School District: http://www.dover.k12.pa.us
Thomas More Law Center: http://www.thomasmore.org
January 18, 2005 6:44 PM
What do you mean "another method"? Where in Genesis does it say what method God used?
In Genesis 1 it says that man was created in God's image. Doesn't say how. In Genesis 2, it says God created man from dust. How'd God do that?
Did God pick up dust and change it's atomic structure? Did he perhaps sort through the dust to find the molecuels He wanted and assemble them chemically? Did He use some kind of chemical vats, or physical jigs to hold the bones in place while he placed the muscles and skin?
The big question is, how long did it take? Genesis 2 doesn't say.
I say God is very patient, and it took him about 2+ billion years. And His toolbox is a nifty thing called Evolution.
The simple fact is, Genesis doesn't say. And for you to impose your simple understanding of the universe and claim that He COULD NOT have used Evolution, I believe is arrogant.
We've been talking about interpretations all day. Who's interpretation of what? Which post?
The epistemology and presuppositions that you use to determine what makes a fact a fact must have some basis. If you believe in the word of scientists, that belief is embedded in something. What makes the word of a scientist more trustworthy than the words of the Bible?
Accordingly, if there is a scintilla of a possibility for some other explanation and you claim that evolution is a "fact," regardless of that possibility, you are enmeshed in faith system just as much as an individual who believes in the biblical account. You may not want to admit it, but it is so.
There is a significant "sect" of Darwinists who use the supposed evidence of evolution as proof that there is no God and we are nothing more than an accumulation of atoms. Their rejection of the transcendency of human life has been embodied in Roe v. Wade. The anniversary of that case is one of their holy days.
So please, don't try to suggest that evolution is not a religion.
However, Exodus 20 is fairly clearly and unambiguous when God says, in reference to the command to keep the Sabbath day that "in six days the Lord made the heaven and earth the sea and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day, wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it."
It would be entirely absurd, and there is no basis for suggesting, thatf God would speak in reference to a Sabbath day of 24 hours and in the same verse refer to creation "days" of indeterminate length. Hence, you have to exegetically refute the clear teaching of Exodus 20 in order to support your position regarding "confusing" reading of Genesis 1 and 2.
Unless you can do that, using the Bible, your defense of evolution as God's "toolbox" is indefensible.
Matter of fact, two of the most highly respected and degreed evo's here belong to that "sect" -- they are able to word everything in such a way as to convince the others, all the while slipping-in fallacies under the radar.
You are confusing atheism with what you call "Darwinism". Atheism is a belief system, a "religion". Evolution is not.
Some atheists use Evolution to support their arguments, as Christians have been known to use science to support their arguments as well. That does not make science a part of Christianity, nor Evolution a part of the religion of atheism.
RadioAstronomer posted a very long piece at #263 that I notice no believer has responded to. No doubt afraid to actually consider the arguments RA brought out.
From post 263: How can we determine on a pure faith based belief system, which is the correct model or “truth”? When I ask this question I get answers like; the Bible told me, my pastor stated it, or I prayed and God himself told me. Well, if there were immutable truths, wouldn't’t everyone get the same answer when they prayed or read the same book? Since there is an ongoing fierce argument between the different religions, obviously this is not the case.
You said "Bible believing Christians admit that the biblical account of creation is a fact. That is based on their willingness to accept the word of God as 'fact'".
So to you, it is true, just because you believe it is. It's just faith. That's all.
Evolution and other sciences are based on centuries of examining physical evidence. Stuff you can hold in your hand. Not just the paper pages of a book printed in Nashville that has no proof of who wrote it. You, and probably most everybody you know, just believe it's true, and that's the end of it. You have a consensus of believers around you to support you, and it's "truth".
I've argued this issue from the perspective that you don't need to abandon your faith in God just to understand that Evolution is fact. All you need to do is accept that there is confusion about what the true interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2 is. That's it.
The fact that books and web sites are devoted to telling you what Genesis "really" means, ought to give you a clue that it's really not clear exactly what it does mean.
And finally. I've made the point innumerable times that I believe it's a stupid idea for Christians to force schools to teach ID, because their young children will be forced to defend their faith as you have just done here. Will they be up to it? Or will they decide that Jesus is just a younger Santa Claus, and will never believe in Him again?
I'd like you to tell me whether you think I'm right or wrong. Is teaching ID a good idea, knowing that a discussion like we're having today will be forced on your children? And wouldn't changing your closed mind about the meaning of Genesis be a much smarter thing to do?
Nor does it take into account that, for such a meteorological event to take place, the resulting atmospheric pressure would kill any life and the concentrations of nitrogen an oxygen would have been toxic to Noah and his floating zoo.
One word "Canopy"....and Noah lived to be 900....but live spans decreased rapidly after him
We won't even bother discussing how he was able to round up animals from Australia and other isolated geographical areas. Nor will we bother discussing how many gross tons of food he would've needed to feed 2 animals of every species for 40 days. No - I'd prefer to leave Creationism as the nice story I was told when I was 4, rather than ruin it with fact.
Have you ever read the bible? TOWER OF BABEL, if you need help let me know.
Mt St Helen's is an amazing study in how quickly natural features can change under the right circumstances, have you visited Mt. St. Helen's? REAL LIFE NOT COMPUTER ANIMATED POSSIBILITIES.
That magical wand that brought life into existence from nonlife.
Still waiting for answers to post 233. Or is there really no difference between ID and Creationism in your minds?
What you need to do is sit down with someone who knows the Bible and have them help you. It's not a matter of "interpretation". The original language is Hebrew (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament). THe truth is revealed through the original language.
I get the impression that you don't want to understand anything. You are looking to bolster your disbelief via me - LOL!
I could sit here and tell you what to believe but with you that will not work. You NEED to start looking at the Hebrew and Greek and start answering some of your own questions.
You mention accounts by 3 different people, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. WHY is it so odd that 3 different people would have slightly different accounts? Yet, you will willingly beleive evolutionary theory when there are more than three diametrically opposed theories without question. These accounts in the Bible complement each other. That's more than I can say about evolutionary theory.
You need to do som soul searching.
Best Regards,
The scientific theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.Note: Intelligent design theory does NOT claim that science can determine the identity of the intelligent cause. Nor does it claim that the intelligent cause must be a “divine being” or a “higher power” or an “all-powerful force.” All it proposes is that science can identify whether certain features of the natural world are the products of intelligence.
Just to quibble, I would call it a lack of one, a specific one.
"So my slaves still have to honor me? Can I put my wife outside during 'that time of the month'? Can I stone her, as the Bible commands, if she commits adultery? Better yet, can I have sex with her sister if she's unable to produce a son for me?"
Ah, you like to pick on the Old Testament. This was directed to the Jews. You might want to look up in the Hebrew what a slave is. I'd liek to know where this is stated?
"Can I put my wife outside during 'that time of the month'?"
"Can I stone her, as the Bible commands, if she commits adultery?"
This was Jewish Law under the Old Testament. The New Testament voids that even for Jews.
"Better yet, can I have sex with her sister if she's unable to produce a son for me?"
Old Testament again ... may I suggest you spend your time and effort with the New Testament since you are obvioulsy not Jewish and need to udnerstand hwo things changed with the birth and death of Christ.
Just to quibble, I would call it a lack of one, a specific one.
Just to quibble, myself, I'd say atheism is a belief system that there is no deity. Agnosticism would be lack of belief.
Perhaps Dimensio would be willing to quibble some more.
People can believe in whatever they wish to believe. But the education of science must be left alone to the realm of scientists. This imposition of politics onto science is futile and will eventually fail.
The historical Thomas More was killed because he defied the authority of the state, in the person of a King Henry VIII of England. In an insutlting irony to his true legacy, this group, in More's name, seeks to use the power of the state to force a non-scientific idea upon science.
That biology teacher, Jennifer Miller, in her refusal to read the statement and her not taking any questions on this imposition of ignorance by the ignorant, is acting more in accordance with the real Thomas More. May all biology teachers follow her example. May they not share his fate.
The More Center was founded by Domino's Pizza founder Tom Monaghan, a staunch Catholic. Perhaps the Pope should inform him that evolution is accepted by the Church. In what would be the irony of the century, science teachers should appeal to the Pope in order to protect the integrity of science.
Really? So the Ten Commandments are null and void now to a practicing Christian?
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.