I suggest a counter-point.
Posted on 11/13/2007 1:40:53 PM PST by yoe
A packet for educators issued by the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) in conjunction with the NOVA program "Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial" encourages teaching practices that are probably unconstitutional, a conservative organization stated on Tuesday.
"The NOVA/PBS teaching guide encourages the injection of religion into classroom teaching about evolution in a way that likely would violate current Supreme Court precedents about the First Amendment's Establishment Clause," said John West, vice president for public policy and legal affairs at the Discovery Institute, in a news release.
The 22-page document is a companion piece to the two-hour NOVA docudrama, "Judgment Day," airing on most network affiliates Tuesday night. The film is about a trial concerning intelligent design that took place in Dover, Pa., in 2005.
The guide claims to provide teachers with "easily digestible information to guide and support you in facing challenges to evolution."
In the booklet, teachers are instructed to use such discussion questions as: "Can you accept evolution and still believe in religion?" The answer to that query is provided as: "Yes. The common view that evolution is inherently antireligious is simply false."
"This statement is simplistic and not neutral among different religions, and in that sense arguably inconsistent with Supreme Court teachings concerning neutrality," said attorney Casey Luskin, program officer for public policy and legal affairs at the institute.
"The Supreme Court ruled in Epperson v. Arkansas that the government must maintain 'neutrality between religion and religion,'" said Randal Wenger, a Pennsylvania attorney who filed amicus briefs in the Kitzmiller v. Dover School District case.
"Because the briefing packet only promotes religious viewpoints that are friendly towards evolution, this is not neutral, and PBS is encouraging teachers to violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause," Wenger added.
In its news release, the Discovery Institute indicates that it has enlisted more than a dozen attorneys and legal scholars, including Wenger, to review the PBS teaching guide with an eye to its constitutionality.
"The PBS materials, in suggesting that students need not be concerned that evolution violates their religion, ironically equip public school teachers to violate our current conception of the First Amendment by explicitly teaching students concerning matters of religious belief," Wenger said.
"The irony is that discussing intelligent design would not teach any student about any religious belief - the PBS materials, on the other hand, will," he said.
Luskin noted that the teaching guide also presents false information about the theory of intelligent design.
"The teaching guide is also riddled with factual errors that misrepresent both the standard definition of intelligent design and the beliefs of those scientists and scholars who support the theory," the attorney added.
As a result, the institute is providing its own guide for educators, "The Theory of Intelligent Design," which will help teachers better understand the debate between Darwinian evolution and intelligent design.
Cybercast News Service previously reported that in December 2004, parents in Dover filed the first-ever challenge to intelligent design being taught in public schools, claiming it violated their religious liberty by promoting particular religious beliefs to their children under the guise of science education.
Just over a year later, U.S. District Judge John Jones III ruled that the school system may not include intelligent design in its science curriculum because intelligent design is not a scientific concept.
Telephone calls and e-mails seeking a response from the Public Broadcasting System were not returned by press time. However, on the PBS Web site, the program is described as capturing "the turmoil that tore apart the community of Dover, Pa., in one of the latest battles over teaching evolution in public schools."
"Featuring trial reenactments based on court transcripts and interviews with key participants - including expert scientists and Dover parents, teachers and town officials - 'Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial' follows the celebrated federal case of Kitzmiller v. Dover School District," the site states.
"In 2004, the Dover school board ordered science teachers to read a statement to high school biology students suggesting that there is an alternative to Darwin's theory of evolution called intelligent design - the idea that life is too complex to have evolved naturally and therefore must have been designed by an intelligent agent," the Web site says.
"The teachers refused to comply," it adds.
"'Judgment Day' captures on film a landmark court case with a powerful scientific message at its core," said Paula Apsell, NOVA's senior executive producer. "Evolution is one of the most essential, yet - for many people - least understood of all scientific theories, the foundation of biological science."
"We felt it was important for NOVA to do this program to heighten the public understanding of what constitutes science and what does not and, therefore, what is acceptable for inclusion in the science curriculum in our public schools," Apsell said.
Nevertheless, Discovery Institute attorney Casey Luskin disagreed that the program is just about science.
"PBS gives a false definition of intelligent design that is a complete straw man argument," Luskin said. "Scientists who support intelligent design seek evidence of design in nature, and argue that such evidence points to intelligent design, based on our historical knowledge of cause and effect."
"So intelligent design theory is not an argument based on what we don't know, but rather an argument about what we do know," he said.
Unless the subject is "Climate Change"...
“Evolution does not explain Creation.” - Charles Darwin
I see no problem with that statement.
Why would anyone expect a left wing organization to care about free speech? They are the ones who eliminate free speech when they get into power.
What they have is a quasi-religious philosophy that mankind is evil, the earth is good, and that therefore man must be harming the earth. That and the evidence from ground based recordings that the average temperatures have risen over the last few decades.
I actually am a geologist. And I went into it because the wonder of the earth and its formation are truly a marvel to see. The things that the average person glosses over as “pretty” or just interesting are beautiful and awe inspiring to me. I have no problem with reconciling God creating it and the evidence before me of how long it took.
Well, exactly true.
The worst thing we can do, and they have us jumping through hoops like trained dogs these days, is divide and take out after each other.
Who benefits when useful idiots tear holes in one another?
Dang and we are sooo falling for it!
It takes a lot of stones to say that.
Cool. Do we get to see where the ID proponents perjured themselves when trying to distance the ID policy from their religious agenda?
True enough. The Discovery Institute has no credibility left - they've been caught in too many lies.
Heat is explained by one dominant theory too, but you know my house is still pretty warm.
Breaking News, no less.
The people making these attacks on science are the people who spend their lives trying to force schools to teach religion.
For them to come back and say that teachers are not allowed to even say they don’t oppose religion and that science doesn’t oppose religion is highly hypocritical.
The lawyers and PR flacks at the Dyscovery Institute are getting hysterical over this NOVA show. I think they are afraid that what once was a dry court transcript is now being made into a memorable visual event -- and the trial showed how truly disingenuous the Dyscovery Institute's support for ID really was.
Here are some of the highlights of the Dyscovery Institute's role in the Dover affair (from the Court's decision).
“Can they show Inherit the Wind? That’s a movie about a trial as well.”
I’d drink to that if they also had to show “Monkey Trial”, the American
Experience episode about what happened in Dayton, TN. It’s actually a
decent documentary as “American Experience” is one of the few islands
of quality in the tax-dollar black hole that is PBS.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/monkeytrial/
Why anyone would ever trust the government to raise their children is a source of endless amazement to me.
I just don’t understand why some conservatives seem to fall for the claims of liberals. That tells me something about the power of public school indoctrination.
Man-made global warming is a very young hypothesis. The problem is that it got quickly politicized in only a decade or so and pushed far beyond the evidence by people with non-scientific motivations (like Gore wanting to be relevant).
Contrast with Natural Selection, which came to acceptance on its merits over a much longer period.
I suggest a counter-point.
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.