Religious idea forced on classes, court told

Harrisburg Patriot-News ^ | 9/28/05 | Bill Sulon

[Crackingham]

Dover Area School District's policy of informing students about intelligent design was the culmination of efforts by some school board members to impose their religious beliefs on students in science class, three Dover Twp. residents testified yesterday.

"I feel they brought a religious idea into the classroom," Tammy Kitzmiller said of the district's policy, which mandates that teachers or administrators inform students that Darwinian evolution is "just a theory" with "gaps" and that "intelligent design is an explanation of origin of life that differs from Darwin's view."

Kitzmiller is one of 11 parents who, with support from the American Civil Liberties Union, sued the school board in an attempt to have the statement eliminated. They argue that it violates the principle of the separation of church and state. The ACLU wants to link religion to the Dover statement and argue that the connection violates the First Amendment ban on establishment of religion. The board's lawyers, from the Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center, have said the statement is not rooted in religion.

"It is absolutely religiously based," said Aralene "Barrie" Callahan, who served on the school board from 1993 to 2003, when she lost her bid for re-election.

Callahan, testifying in U.S. District Court in Harrisburg, called intelligent design "clearly religious" and said that a book mentioned in the district's statement, "Of Pandas and People," is "outdated" and "unworthy as a science book."

"Pandas" -- there are 50 copies in the Dover High School library -- raises questions about evolution and offers intelligent design as an alternative. Supporters of intelligent design believe the universe and many living things are so complex that they must have been created by an intelligent, higher being.

Callahan said school board member Alan Bonsell, while at a district-sponsored retreat in March 2003, said he "did not believe in evolution" and that if evolution needs to be part of the science curriculum, it should be balanced out "50-50" with lessons on creationism.

Callahan said her daughter went through 10th-grade science class at Dover without a biology textbook, because the district did not buy copies of the textbook that year. She said when she asked William Buckingham, then a school board member, why the district did not buy the textbook, he replied that it was "laced with Darwinism."

[taxesareforever]

Can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

[little jeremiah]

later pingout.

[Dimensio]

Oh, and evolution is based on facts? No, it is based on theory which means guesses.

Theory does not mean "guesses". Your fundamental ignorance of scientific terminology is not an argument against evolution.

[taxesareforever]

LOL!

[Dimensio]

LOL!

Stunning rebuttal. You've clearly demonstrated that you have absolutely no intelligent response.

[taxesareforever]

ROLMAO!!

[jennyp]

Machines, such as junkyard cranes, are used by designers and engineers and technicians to make other machines. Often one machine is made -- a prototype. The other machines copy its design. Perfect parallel. That is, if you adult enough to accept it, and not some brat whining.

Ummm...

Of course it's the engineers who copy the prototype's design. Thing is, in the meantime they've done simulations & made other prototypes & thrown out dozens of paper sketches. In real intelligent design processes, there is an enormous amount of mutation & natural selection that goes on inside the designers' heads, in computer simulations, and in tests of physical prototypes, not to mention feedback from the customers of version 1.0.

Even if ID were true you cannot get away from Darwinism. LOL!

[Dimensio]

You made your point already. You've made it abundantly clear that you not only don't understand evolution, but you also don't understand the scientific method and you've no interest in educating yourself in either manner, becuase you'd rather go on hysterical rants about subjects on which you know nothing while arrogantly proclaiming yourself an expert enough to refute it all.

[gakrak]

No, but neither can you so it will remain a mater of faith and belief. Amen.

[Dimensio]

No, but neither can you so it will remain a mater of faith and belief. Amen.

You're correct. The notion that the "Father God" created the universe and all life will never be anything more than that. Now, evolution on the other hand is supported by actual physical evidence.

[bvw]

in the meantime they've done simulations & made other prototypes & thrown out dozens of paper sketches. In real intelligent design processes, there is an enormous amount of mutation & natural selection that goes on inside the designers' heads

That would correspond to the mystical realm, viewed in the worldview of the assembly and line managing machines.

[taxesareforever]

And you are so intelligent that you will not seek other sources outside the realm of believers in evolution.

http://www.icr.org/

[Dimensio]

And you are so intelligent that you will not seek other sources outside the realm of believers in evolution.

I've seen ICR's information. It's not impressive.

[taxesareforever]

I've seen ICR's information. It's not impressive.

So much for acceptance of another view.

[Dimensio]

So much for acceptance of another view.

Yes, how dare I not accept views that don't correspond to reality. You know, there are people who think that it's perfectly acceptable to engage in sexual acts with young children. I don't "accept" their views either. (NO, I am NOT comparing creationists to child molesters, I am merely demonstrating the absurdity of taxesareforever's complaint with an extreme example. Anyone who claims that I am equating creationists with child molesters is a complete and total moron with absolutely no reading comprehension ability and no grip on reality whatsoever).

[taxesareforever]

Yes, how dare I not accept views that don't correspond to reality.

Finally we are on the same page. The only difference is is that your and my reality mean two entirely different things.

[RunningWolf]

Yes, how dare I not accept views that don't correspond to reality...

(whoooo boy! quite a from that to this)

..You know, there are people who think that it's perfectly acceptable to engage in sexual acts with young children. I don't "accept" their views either. (NO, I am NOT comparing creationists to child molesters

taxesareforever has made no complaint. So this excuse of yours to that you need to make this vulgar, ugly, extreme non-comparison is false and untrue, and yet it is the kind of non-comparison you always go to. This says much about Dimensio, and nothing about evolution and intelligent design as an alternative.

So why then do you.. Dimensio.. always go to these sorts of non-comparisons when many others would be equally illustrative?

This is a bunch of vile immature garbage.

Wolf

[little jeremiah]

Moral Absolutes Ping.

Well, the fun never stops, does it. Every day there are gazillions of articles about evo-crevo. Obviously I don't ping out most of them. But this one is interesting. Since the First Amendment (which is what I assume they're concerned about here, at least theoretically), states that "Congress shall make no law" in connection with "establishing a religion", I don't see any act of Congress here, nor do I see any establishment of any religion.

I wonder (actually I don't wonder, I know the reaction) how evo-fundies would react if during the class when the TOE is being discussed, the teacher just mentioned - say for five minutes - that some scientists have criticisms of the TOE, and if you're interested, here's some books you could read on your own time.

Anyone think even that would be acceptable to the religion of evolution? No? I bet it wouldn't either.

We're just evil blasphemers. Good thing that iron torture racks are out of fashion. Richard Dawkins who is a famous popularizer of neo-Darwinism (author of "The Blind Watchmaker" IIRC), stated that those who don't believe in evolution are actually "wicked" and shouldn't be allowed to hold certain positions and whatnot. I'll have to find the quote. IOW, belief in evolution should be a test people need to pass in order to qualify for certain jobs, positions, etc.

Now just who are the fundies here?

Freepmail me if you want on/off this pinglist.

I mentioned to someone the other day that evolution is really just a dead corpse, still flapping a bit. That's why the evo-fundies are going barking mad. They can't tolerate one milimeter of a tiny hint of any criticism. The facade is crumbling. It's just another religion, only the difference is it's a false one.

[blowfish]

No, it is based on theory which means guesses.

??? Sounds like someone slept through all their science classes... :^)

[taxesareforever]

Yeh, you can tell which ones did. They are the undoctrinated ones.