(Scratches Dover, Pennsylvania, off the places he might consider moving to …)
When the Dover Area School Board voted to require the teaching of intelligent design Monday night, it likely became the first district in the United States to do so.
Until now, the battleground over intelligent design ? the theory that all life was created by a divine being ? has been largely fought in states such as Kansas and Ohio. But with Dover’s 6-to-3 vote in favor of teaching alternative theories to evolution, “including, but not limited to, intelligent design,” the battle lines might have shifted to include York County.
School board member Bill Buckingham is the chief architect of Dover’s newly revised biology curriculum that states “Students will be made aware of gaps/problems in Darwin’s Theory and of other theories of evolution including, but not limited to, intelligent design. Note: Origins of life will not be taught.”
As a theist, I believe that there is a design behind the universe. But I think trying to teach that ineffable design in school is useless, especially if it is couched as an “alternative” to natural selection.
The concept of “intelligent design,” is the idea that many aspects of life are too complex to have occurred randomly and therefore must have been created by a divine being. Its supporters say teaching it in the classroom is about fairness, giving equal time to competing theories.
I believe that the life was created out of whole cloth 47,000 years ago by a giant flying turtle with flames coming out of its shell holes, and the proof of this can be found in the inadvertent unconscious channeling of this event by the crafters of the various Gamera films. Will the ID supporters give me equal time to have my competing theory espoused in a classroom?
Beyond question, this is meant to give a scientific gloss to the insertion of religious concepts into classrooms. Even if “origins of life” aren’t to be taught, presumably the “intelligence” behind the creation of life will indeed be attributed to a divine creature (as opposed to, say, space aliens).
The devout Christian admitted that before presenting the revised curriculum to the board, he had been talking to a conservative Michigan law firm that is interested in defending an intelligent design legal challenge. […] Buckingham said Tuesday night that he has been promised legal support by the Ann Arbor-based Thomas More Law Center, a law firm that champions such issues as school prayer and “promoting public morality.”
Frankly, I don’t have any problems balancing the idea of natural selection with the idea of a Creator, nor do I need someone to “prove” it to me (as someone once said to someone else — wish I could remember who — “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.”). Regardless of my beliefs, though, I don’t even want my personal religious opinions taught in my own daughter’s classroom (I have plenty of time to indoctrinate her at home, bwah-ha-ha), let alone someone else’s. One can certainly discuss the various challenges regarding various theories of evolution — including how it has in fact evolved since Darwin’s original theories (like most science does). Opening the discussion to theological alternatives, though, is bad science.
Here’s hoping the Thomas More Law Center gets a chance to “defend” the policy change in court real soon.
(via Les)