Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Creationism Makes Its Mark
religion dispatches ^ | January 6, 2008 | Lauri Lebo

Posted on 01/07/2009 6:00:18 PM PST by Inappropriate Laughter

When their son Zachary came home from science class with a cross burned on his forearm It was not the religion that bothered his parents, but the injury to their child. They sued, and brought science v. creationism back into the courts for another round.

Teacher John Freshwater and the brand on the arm of his student

It was a little over three years ago, on December 20, 2005, that Judge John E. Jones III issued his ruling in Kitzmiller v. Dover that intelligent design was not science, but merely repackaged creationism—and that it had no business in biology class.

The hoopla was immediate and enduring. Jones’ decision launched headlines across the globe, not to mention celebrations by the trial’s plaintiffs, their legal team and science experts (who send “Merry Kitzmas” greetings to each other on the anniversary).

For many, the Dover case became a cautionary tale of what can happen when a public school board believes its attempts to insert religion into the classroom can stand up to national attention and legal scrutiny.

But it would be a mistake to think that public school educators of fundamentalist faiths have made peace with science. Attacks on evolutionary education continue to take place out of the national spotlight, in small towns where people are reluctant to challenge the behavior of those clinging to power, and where teachers use their classrooms to proselytize to students away from the disapproving eyes of church-and-state watchdogs. They continue to preach intelligent design, the concept that life’s complexity demands a divine hand, and out-and-out Young Earth Creationism.

X Marks the Spot

Nowhere right now is this more apparent than in the small town of Gambier, Ohio, a place that bears a striking resemblance to the fictional town of Frank Capra’s Bedford Falls.

Here, in late September, just off a wide-spaced street that leads to the green campus of the liberal arts school of Kenyon College, a small-framed woman in dark sunglasses takes a seat at the local restaurant.

She is trying to pass unnoticed. Nervously, she nods to the owner of the establishment. Because she doesn’t know who is on her side and who’s not, Jenifer Dennis keeps her head down.

Only weeks later, Dennis would be forced to out herself publicly. But for now, she is trying to remain anonymous in order to protect her son Zachary from the inevitable recriminations from some who reside in the Mount Vernon School District in conservative south-central Ohio.

Last December she and her husband Steve accused a popular 8th-grade science teacher, John Freshwater, of using an electrostatic device known as a Tesla coil to brand a cross into Zachary’s arm [see image above]. They say the burn, which in photos show an 8-by-4-inch mark on his forearm, raised blisters, kept their son awake that night, and lasted for several weeks.

At first glance, they saw the mark as a religious emblem. But their first concern was less about religion and more about what they considered to be a case of a teacher injuring their son.

Their accusations and their resulting lawsuit against the district have brought them criticism. A sign posted in a yard near their house read, “The student goes. We Support Mr. Freshwater. The Bible stays!”

For all the unusual elements to this story, this part is the strangest. At first, Jenifer and Steve were timid about pursuing legal action against the school district, fearing that they would be perceived as anti-Christian.

They’re not.

“We are religious people,” they said in a statement after they filed suit in June. “But we were offended when Mr. Freshwater burned a cross onto the arm of our child. This was done in science class in December 2007, where an electric shock machine was used to burn our child.”

Changing Stories: An X or a Cross?

The day after the incident, Jenifer and Steve met with the district Superintendent Stephen Short and showed him a photo of her son’s burn. Jenifer recalls that she was told that Freshwater’s use of the device was unacceptable and the district would investigate.

What took place over the next several months is not exactly clear. As is typical in these types of stories, there is much disagreement over who is on the side of truth. But some details have emerged.

The district hired an independent investigator. After a lengthy investigation in which Freshwater, other teachers, students, and administrators were all interviewed, the consultant concluded in a report that Freshwater had been teaching students that evolution is a lie for at least 11 years.

The report also said that Freshwater had witnessed to students, at one point telling them that there couldn’t possibly be a genetic link to homosexuality because the Bible says it is a sin. The report also said that he handed out Bibles to members of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes and led them in prayers during school hours. Also, Freshwater said he had given a voluntary extra-credit assignment to students who watched Expelled, a documentary that argues teachers who believe in intelligent design are facing discrimination.

According to the report, Freshwater at first denied the incident. Later he admitted to the experiment, admitting he marked Zachary with an X. However, students interviewed for the investigation all described it as a cross.

The link to the full report is here.

In response to the investigation, Freshwater was told to remove all religious items from his room, including a poster of the Ten Commandments hanging on the wall, stickers with scripture on them, extra Bibles he kept in the back of the classroom, and the Bible that he kept on his desk.

In April, Freshwater, fearing disciplinary action, took his side of the story public. He never mentioned the branding incident. Rather he said it was because of the Bible on his desk.

Because he had refused to remove it, citing religious freedom under the First Amendment, he said he was being persecuted. Students organized a rally for him, bringing their Bibles to school in support. A Web site devoted to Freshwater’s cause is called www.bibleonthedesk.com.

But Dennis said the issue was never about the Bible on the desk. And nowhere in the lawsuit’s initial complaint is it even mentioned.

Rather, she says, it’s because her son was branded.

After Freshwater took his side public, Jenifer said she and her husband were worried Freshwater wouldn’t face disciplinary action. In June, they filed a lawsuit against Freshwater and the district for violating the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause by permitting religion to be taught in class, and for failing to protect their son. Federal law allows such civil liberties cases to be filed anonymously. Freshwater has filed a countersuit, citing defamation of character.

In July, the school board suspended Freshwater without pay based on the investigatory report, saying he had misused the electrical device, taught religion in his science class, and failed to follow district curriculum and rules.

Both sides are now awaiting the outcome of administrative hearing to determine whether he should be permanently fired. The hearings took place this fall and have been continued until January 6.

For now, while he waits for the outcome of the hearings, Freshwater is selling Christmas trees. Last week, he said he believes the district is retaliating against him because he advocated for “critical analysis” of evolution in 2003.

“They’ve marked me as a religious—I don’t know if I want to use this phrase about myself—but as a religious fanatic,” Freshwater said.

Freshwater is careful to say he doesn’t object to all elements of evolutionary theory, but would simply like to raise some questions about it. He said that in the 21 years he has been a teacher, he has been using the Tesla coil on students, even though manufacturer instructions warn that it is not to be used on human skin. He said he has never had one complaint until now.

Freshwater said that there is no way to tell whether the photo presented by the Dennis family that shows the mark of a cross on a forearm was doctored, or whether it was even Zachary’s arm.

When asked if he was accusing the family of lying, Freshwater said, “Don’t put words in my mouth.”

While he admits using the device on Zachary, he said he didn’t know if it left a mark.

Not Always a Rural Issue

Despite the gruesome elements, the story is less unusual than at first appears.

According to a poll published this spring in the Public Library of Science Biology, one in eight US high school teachers presents creationism as a valid alternative to evolution.

The poll, conducted by Michael Berkman, a political scientist at Pennsylvania State University in University Park, and his colleagues, also learned that 16 percent of teachers believe in creationism.

While Berkman’s research did not address why so many teachers are creationists, he speculated in an e-mail that biology appeals to even fundamentalist Christians:

In Darwin’s day, most biologists felt that they had a calling to describe God’s works. So people of all faith traditions may be drawn to biology, including those whose faith includes a literal interpretation of Genesis. Clearly, a substantial percentage of them are unwilling to accept the geological, chemical, and genetic evidence for an old earth.

Jason Wiles, a Syracuse University biology professor whose research focuses on teaching issues related to biological evolution, said he frequently runs into creationists training to be educators.

“It’s not only in the South, or in rural areas,” Wiles said.

Wiles recently held a workshop for 30 science teachers in the Syracuse city school system. Three of the teachers were actively interested in promoting intelligent design.

He suspects that the reason that so few cases make it to the public stage is that many parents aren’t always aware of what’s going on in the classroom. Also, children are often unaware that the teacher has crossed a Constitutional line.

“A lot of times students just don’t know what their rights are,” Wiles said.

Resolution Far Off

On that day in September, Jenifer Dennis had come to Gambier to meet one of the plaintiffs in the Dover case. I was giving a speech at Kenyon College that night about Dover’s battle. Cyndi Sneath, one of the parents from Dover, had ridden out with me from Harrisburg.

As they sat down at the table, Sneath and Dennis began to compare notes, sharing common experiences. Dennis plopped a large file on the table that details the case and starts flipping through pages. She asked Sneath if she had initially realized how demanding and time-consuming being a plaintiff in a First Amendment case would be. Sneath told her she honestly had no idea what to expect.

At first, Jenifer Dennis said she couldn’t tell if she was overreacting to her son’s arm. “I was thinking maybe I’m crazy,” she said. “I was thinking maybe it’s something they do? And it’s OK?”

Dennis and her husband are both Catholic. They are NASCAR fans who camp in an RV at races. Yet, they are being labeled as elitist and intolerant of religion. At one school board meeting in July, numerous parents and teachers spoke in defense of Freshwater and criticized the parents. One parent told the board, “As a Christian, I don’t accept the separation of church and state.”

During the district’s administrative hearing process, Freshwater successfully argued that Zachary’s name be released publicly. So the anonymous status in the family’s lawsuit has now become a moot point, and the recriminations that the family feared have begun with calls and letters.

But Dennis said she has also had friends and strangers come up to her and say that they’re glad they came forward. She said Zachary, who turned fifteen on Dec. 17, is handling the pressure.

But unlike in the Kitzmiller case, in which Sneath and 10 other parents sued the Dover school district, Jenifer Dennis still feels alone in her fight.

She is looking forward to a resolution in the case. When she started this battle a year ago, she never envisioned it would still be going on through another Christmas. “I just need some closure,” she said. But her lawsuit will no doubt drag on for much longer. The trial date is not until May 2010.

Tags: creationism, darwin, evolution, intelligent design

Lauri Lebo has been a journalist for twenty years. As part of an investigative reporting team, she helped solve two civil rights-era murders. As the York Daily Record’s education reporter, she covered intelligent design’s First Amendment battle. The winner of numerous state and national awards, she lives in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: creationism; education; evolution
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 301-314 next last
To: hosepipe; betty boop; metmom
Thank you so much for sharing your insights!

I recall that years ago a very accomplished mathematician on the forum (pro-evolution by the way) was explaining to other evolutionists in an abiogenesis debate that a single instance of non-life to life would not be sufficient. In essence he claimed that mathematically speaking, the phenomenon would have to be unique in time and widespread.

I recall thinking the reply was odd because it disputed the notion of a common ancestor, a major claim of evolution theory.

betty boop might recall the thread - she and I were engaged in many of the abiogenesis v biogenesis debates.

221 posted on 01/09/2009 12:34:43 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke

Behe accepts common descent and an ancient earth. This is important to know, since he is the only qualified expert witness who testifies in court for the ID position.

He accepts that most evolution, including the ape to human transition, could have arisen by stepwise mutation and selection. This seems to me like something that ID in the classroom advocates should be aware of. If they succeed in getting ID in the classroom, they will be endorsing an alternative to evolution that admits common descent and a multi-billion year old earth.
.


222 posted on 01/09/2009 12:35:05 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Thank you so much for your encouragements, dear brother in Christ, and especially thank you for your blessings! May God bless you always!
223 posted on 01/09/2009 12:35:37 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Or has it never occurred to you that science could be wrong about something?

Pluto used to be a planet. And until the early to mid 1900's most scientists believed there was no beginning of real space and real time. etc.

224 posted on 01/09/2009 12:38:14 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
I recall thinking the reply was odd because it disputed the notion of a common ancestor, a major claim of evolution theory.

No it doesn't. The common ancestor breaks down at the microbe level. Single celled organisms participate in forms of gene sharing that make terms like species meaningless.

Regardless of what skeptics say, we are learning more and more about what is minimally necessary for life. We will probably never know the exact history of first life, but we will find possible scenarios.

And as we find possible scenarios we will be better equipped to calculate probabilities and to narrow down the necessary conditions.

225 posted on 01/09/2009 12:41:53 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: allmendream; tpanther
why don't you show me what a science that incorporated God would sound like?

In our homeschool, the same science that would likely be taught in atheist worldview school was taught in our home. The scaffolding was different.

At appropriate times the children were reminded that the universe, with all its creations, was the work of a rational God. Since He is a rational being, his creations are rational. It is possible and even our duty to discover the workings of our Creator. Doing so does 2 things:

1) It allows us a glimpse into the mind of God.

2) We can use that knowledge to serve our neighbor. ( Jesus said the second greatest commandment is to love your neighbor as yourself.)

So....Leaving this philosphy out of a science class is just as profoundly religiously non-neutral as including it. The **motivations** for studying science would be very different between the two ( godless or God-centered) and the political, cultural, and religious consequences for a our nation would be very different.

There is only **one** possible solution: Get government out of the K-12 business. We must stop trying to crush the freedom of conscience of our neighbor!

nd if one invoked God's blessing or whatever upon the science they do, would they not then defend their interpretation as if it were something of God's rather than just a working model that helped explain and predict the data?

Our family, being Christian believes in a **rational** and **true** God. If the findings aren't **rational** then we have likely made a mistake in our reasoning or scientific process. It would be time to start over looking for the truth.

In our Christian tradition we invoke God's blessing on everything we do. Even something a simple as making a meal, washing the clothes, or stacking the dishwasher are opportunities to thank God that we can bless and serve our families and friends.

We **absolutely** pray over our work. My patients may not have been aware of it but I prayed over **every** one of them. I can't tell you how many patient's told me how strange it was to them that they felt sooooo **comfortable** and safe in my office.

And what would incorporating God do to Science other than drive away any who didn't share your view of God?

It is not a conservative principle to **force* our opinions on other people. We respect the free will of others and we would like them to respect ours. That is why we advocate privatizing K-12 schooling.

226 posted on 01/09/2009 1:10:41 PM PST by wintertime (Good ideas win! Why? Because people are NOT stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: metmom

cites?


227 posted on 01/09/2009 1:14:44 PM PST by From many - one.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: js1138

“What’s the alternative to chance and selection?”

Ummm, let me see...oh yeah, design and creation.

Not sure where you’re going with the Behe stuff. I’m not a particularly big fan of generic ID teaching and am not well versed in it. I favor privatization of the school system or, at a minimum, a return to complete local control of schools so that these issues can be resolved closer to the parent level which is where they belong. Despite relatively recent court meddling to the contrary, there is nothing unconstitutional about allowing local schools to teach the bible if they choose to do so.

I am a strong believer in God and His word if you have any questions about that. And, for the record, I am not some pew potato that’s been taught silly things such as young Earth stuff or Adam and Eve being the very first humans. Serious bible students know those are man-made notions.


228 posted on 01/09/2009 1:16:29 PM PST by BuddhaBrown (Path to enlightenment: Four right turns, then go straight until you see the Light!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: BuddhaBrown
Despite relatively recent court meddling to the contrary, there is nothing unconstitutional about allowing local schools to teach the bible if they choose to do so.

Of course not, if they're private schools.

229 posted on 01/09/2009 1:25:08 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: js1138

“Of course not, if they’re private schools.”

Please cite where the constitution disallows it for public schools.

I assume you realize the First Amendment says no such thing. And, yes, I do understand that later, misguided, SC rulings have used the incorporation doctrine to wield unintended control over states.


230 posted on 01/09/2009 1:35:16 PM PST by BuddhaBrown (Path to enlightenment: Four right turns, then go straight until you see the Light!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
In essence he claimed that mathematically speaking, the phenomenon [of abiogenesis] would have to be unique in time and widespread.

Hi A-G! Unfortunately, I don't recall many details about that conversation. Wish I could: It's a most interesting insight!

[Still reading the Penrose, just completed the chapter on complex numbers. How thrilling to learn that the value of the imaginary number ii, instead of being a total abstraction (as I'd earlier supposed), actually has a real-number value; i.e., 0.207879576.... And he shows you how to derive it!]

Sorry I couldn't be more helpful re: that earlier discussion of abiogenesis. I do agree with that correspondent's statement, FWIW.

231 posted on 01/09/2009 1:38:28 PM PST by betty boop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: BuddhaBrown

You can argue all day about how things should be, but reality says the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of what the Constitution means.

The only check on that is the president’s ability to appoint justices and the people’s ability to elect presidents.

Guess who will be appointing justices?


232 posted on 01/09/2009 1:38:32 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.


233 posted on 01/09/2009 1:40:40 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: BuddhaBrown
I favor privatization of the school system or, at a minimum, a return to complete local control of schools so that these issues can be resolved closer to the parent level which is where they belong. Despite relatively recent court meddling to the contrary, there is nothing unconstitutional about allowing local schools to teach the bible if they choose to do so.

I favor privatization also, and I don't like meddling by federal judges either...but if you want Bible teaching in public schools, you are probably envisioning it's your Bible being taught in your way...but supposed you lived in a community where Catholics were in control, or Mormons, or Muslim immigrants have taken over, and it's the Qu’uran that's taught.

234 posted on 01/09/2009 1:41:59 PM PST by Inappropriate Laughter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: js1138; Alamo-Girl
And as we find possible scenarios we will be better equipped to calculate probabilities and to narrow down the necessary conditions.

For what purpose, exactly?

235 posted on 01/09/2009 1:42:34 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: wintertime
I notice in your own work you keep your blessings silent as well.

Demanding that scientists incorporate God into their work would be like me demanding that you say “I bless you in Jesus’s name” aloud over your patients.

236 posted on 01/09/2009 1:46:11 PM PST by allmendream (Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Curiosity, at least initially.


237 posted on 01/09/2009 1:56:58 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
Demanding that scientists incorporate God into their work would be like me demanding that you say “I bless you in Jesus’s name” aloud over your patients.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Where dis I say I prayed ***ALOUD**? Hm?

I would be impossible for you to find even **ONE** instance where I demand scientists incorporate God into their science. I have no power of their free will and they none over my mind.

I cannot defend an argument of your own creation.

Demanding power over another’s freedom of conscience is NOT a conservative value!

Religious conservatives would **welcome** privatization of K-12 schooling. Let these matters be decided privately. We must stop playing “King of the Freedom of Conscience Hill”!

Actually....I rarely discussed religion with my patient and neither did my husband with his colleagues. The following is the religious reason why:

1) My patients were paying me for my ***FULL***attention to their problem. To have taken time away from that would have been ***stealing**!

2) My husband agreed to work for employer and the agreement was that he do **chemistry**. Doing anything other than that is **stealing**.

However....There is plenty of opportunity before the beginning of the day, during breaks, lunch, and at home to pray for my patients in a quiet and reverent manner.

I am assuming that you have merely missed the mark and would **never** deliberately distort anything I have posted.

238 posted on 01/09/2009 1:59:41 PM PST by wintertime (Good ideas win! Why? Because people are NOT stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: wintertime
I was reading (and appreciating) your post. As usual, your post seemed to draw a lot of out of date responses. I was not going to try to address all the misusers of the "macro evolution" term.

But I think what you said was in line with what I have been convinced of lately. I think when you say macro evolution, that equates to Darwinism.

In an ealrier thread I wrote...even Darwin himself admitted that without fossil records to bridge the evolution gaps(which dont exist), his theory was bunk. And Darwin never imagined the nano-tech like machinery of the DNA contained in cellular structure. The cell was just a black box to him from which life could spring from nothing. If Darwin knew what we know today about the intelligent design going on within DNA and the complex machinery required for something as simple as blood clotting, he would not come to the same conclusion he did.

But some scientists will never admit the answer lies in God. They would rather suppose it was placed here by some other worldly species...just pushing out the question they dont want to actually find the right answer to.

It sounds like this is more your area of expertise than mine. But I thought my post was supportive of your position. I would be interested in your thoughts.

239 posted on 01/09/2009 2:05:14 PM PST by Magnum44 (Terrorism is a disease, precise application of superior force is the ONLY cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: MyTwoCopperCoins

You don’t reject evolution because bad things happen, do you?


240 posted on 01/09/2009 2:15:04 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 301-314 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson