Registered: Aug 2002
Location: Pere Ubu land
Posts: 1080

ACLU sues over ‘intelligent design’ in Pa.
Suit challenges policy on teaching alternative to evolution theory

The Associated Press
Updated: 4:43 p.m. ET Dec. 14, 2004


HARRISBURG, Pa. - Eight families have sued a school district that is requiring students to learn about alternatives to the theory of evolution, claiming the curriculum violates the separation of church and state.

The American Civil Liberties Union and Americans United for Separation of Church and State said the lawsuit was the first to challenge whether public schools should teach “intelligent design,” which holds that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by some higher power. The two organizations are representing the parents in the federal lawsuit.

The Dover Area School District voted 6-3 on Oct. 18 to include intelligent design in the ninth-grade science curriculum, in what is believed to be the first such requirement in the country.

The ACLU contends that intelligent design is a more secular form of creationism — a Bible-based view that credits the origin of species to God — and may violate the constitutional separation of church and state.

One of the parents bringing suit, Tammy Kitzmiller, expressed concern that the school board would mandate the teaching of “something that isn’t accepted as science.” Kitzmiller has two children who attend Dover High School, where teachers of ninth-grade biology are expected to discuss evolution sometime next month.

School officials had no immediate comment on the lawsuit.


At least one other district has recently become embroiled in federal litigation over teaching evolution. A federal judge in Georgia is considering the constitutionality of a suburban Atlanta district’s decision to include a warning sticker about evolution in biology textbooks.

Two of the three dissenting board members have resigned in protest. Angie Yingling, a board member who originally supported the policy, said she later reconsidered her vote.

“Anyone with half a brain should have known we were going to be sued,” she said. “You can’t do this.”


URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6713443/

-----------------------------------

As I have said in another thread, I think creationism or whatever name it trades under these days has a place in education. That place is within the framework of World Mythology or Religious Studies depending on the particular slant you feel most comfortable with. Science it is not; parading it around as a competing scientific theory is fucking retarded. End of story.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35561

I fail to understand why people who understand so little of science insist that what they want to believe is in fact scientific (those of the ID or creationist types who think that their theories have any scientific weight).

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2002
Location: Pere Ubu land
Posts: 1080

Pseudoscience gives the veneer of respectability and a foundational unassailability that they crave. Faith alone is not enough; yet science -- real science -- is no harbor either for it is unpredictable, hard to understand, and in constant flux. They want something timeless and real to stand upon, but feel too vulnerable too exposed without the seeming language of science to support those cherished notions.

Why?

Well, the world is powerfully and visibily shaped by science. It's hard to discount science as 'untrue' when you are surrounded by the fruits of it. At heart, I think they have a fundamental misunderstanding of what science is, and therefore perceive its values and conclusions as a direct threat upon their belief system. Time has shown that a direct frontal assault on science won't work, so now they seek to corrupt and incorporate from within but fail due to their fundamental misunderstanding.

The flip side of this perceived conflict was best said by Joseph Campbell I think (I paraphrase), "They confuse the connotation with the denotation." That is, they take the literal truth of some myth and in so doing they miss the (ultimately) uncommunicable truth that is beyond all art or language.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2004
Location: in colorado somewhere!
Posts: 25591

Science isn't always proven so to a sick twisted christian mind(...or any mind!) science is offensive. So anything that remotely suggest a theory should be eliminated from school.
So scratch science.
Math can be a theory as well. What if 2 plus 2 is a number other than 4?
Scratch math.
Literature is writings of a person with thoughts that some may not agree with.
Scratch literature.
Art is another expression of an individual.
Scratch art.
And gym prompts some people to have an opinion on how lousy another person is at playing said sport.
Scratch gym.
Which leads us to study hall.
Where we learn to think about what little subjects are left to think about.
And thinking is offensive to those that can't.
Scratch school.
So what do we do?
I think people should be left with choices.
What class they want to go to.
What class is offensive,what class is not.
And if there's no funding in said class some would want to know about,
oh well.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

EEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2002
Location: Pere Ubu land
Posts: 1080

Who said anything about cutting off choices?

I didn't say, "Don't teach creationism." I said, "Don't teach creationism as though it is science." ...because it isn't. That's a fact.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2003
Location: I cant say I buy this completely,
Posts: 2506

I dont want my kids to learn about crazy and stupid ideas. I dont want to pay for other peoples kids to learn about crazy and stupid ideas. ID or what the fuck ever is such a fucking obvious attempt at teaching God to children in state schools. You know it is, I know it is...someone is full of shit if they think otherwise(seriously, if youre a proponent of creationism in schools think for a second please or at least have the balls to be honest about your intentions). No preaching to captive audiences full of children, not on my dime. It insults everyones intelligence when creationist evangelizing goes so far as to make the sort of pathetic attempts we see ID put up in its lame effort at refuting incontrovertible scientific facts(i.e the age of the earth, what the fossile record actually says, the ways we can actually see evolution in play in todays world, etc.).

Please, I just dont know what to say to people who buy this ID shit...I mean, what the fuck is going on in their mind? Why do people think like that? Is ignorance THAT intoxicating?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2002
Location: Pere Ubu land
Posts: 1080

If tigerjez were still around I'm sure she could enlighten us.

As far as teaching mythology (and let's face it, christianity IS a mythology) in public schools, I have no problem with that whatsoever. Just be upfront with the subject; don't mask it as a science. I took a world mythology elective in high school that was taught by a christian (she was very honest about her belief the first day of class but never brought it up again afterwards) and found it immensely rewarding.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2003
Location: I cant say I buy this completely,
Posts: 2506

quote:

---

Originally posted by tessellated
At heart, I think they have a fundamental misunderstanding of what science is, and therefore perceive its values and conclusions as a direct threat upon their belief system.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2002
Location: Pere Ubu land
Posts: 1080

I just got done downloading the Power of Myth series of interviews using eMule. Great shit indeed.

As far as the 'values' of science I disagree, but insofar as I view the values of science to be curiousity about the physical world mixed with skepticism and also a basic belief in the scientific method. I don't mean values in terms of a moral system, which is probably what you are referring to.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2004
Location: in colorado somewhere!
Posts: 25591

quote:

---

Originally posted by tessellated
Who said anything about cutting off choices?
I didn't say, "Don't teach creationism." I said, "Don't teach creationism as though it is science." ...because it isn't. That's a fact.

---

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

EEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2002
Location: Pere Ubu land
Posts: 1080

Or have a class that is an elective on World Mythology which provides one with some insight on religion in general and also some of the common patterns that are innate to all religions.

Or not.

It's (obviously) a matter for the public as a whole to decide what should be a required part of the curriculum or what should at least be available as an elective. That's not what I am debating here. I am simply saying don't muddle kids minds with bullshit bogus lies in the form of creationism = science because it doesn't.

Personally, I support having a class on World Mythology as an elective, but then I also took advantage of this myself in high school so I am probably biased, or something.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2000
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 7504

Yes, yes, intelligent design is a fine pinata for you folks to have your swings at.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2002
Location: Pere Ubu land
Posts: 1080

That's rather not the point. Obviously it isn't in Harrisburg, Pa. Nor was it in my own town 4 years ago when some misguided high school kids tried to get creationism taught along side evolution. I know there are some other places in the country right now that are fighting this too.

This sort of thing is born, at least in part, of scientific illiteracy. Poor math and science skills don't bode well for a country's economic or technological future. Critical thinking should always be en vogue. The USA lags behind other developed countries in these (math and science, in particular) areas.

According to a Newsweek poll reported on msnbc:

quote:

---

Sixty-two percent [of americans] say they favor teaching creation science in addition to evolution in public schools; 26 percent oppose such teaching, the poll shows. Forty-three percent favor teaching creation science instead of evolution in public schools; 40 percent oppose the idea.

---

Last edited by tessellated on 12-15-2004 at 04:07 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2002
Location:
Posts: 3063

quote:

---

Originally posted by CHiPsJr
Yes, yes, intelligent design is a fine pinata for you folks to have your swings at.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 24299

In your case, that is an E=mc2-esque conundrum.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26383

Reminds me of a New York Times bit I read the other day, about the emboldening of christian conservatives.

Emphasis mine.

quote:

---

Energized by electoral victories last month that they say reflect wide support for more traditional social values, conservative Christian advocates across the country are pushing ahead state and local initiatives on thorny issues, including same-sex marriage, public education and abortion [...]

In Texas, conservative Christians are backing an amendment to prevent human cloning, a measure that would also block the kind of cloning used in embryonic stem-cell research. In Georgia, advocacy groups hope to win approval this year of two measures limiting abortion, after redistricting helped Republicans take control of the state legislature. In Kansas, conservatives have won a majority on the State Board of Education, which is expected to introduce changes this spring to the high school science curriculum challenging the theory of evolution. And in Maryland, some black churches have joined with a white Republican state delegate to push for a ban on same-sex marriage.

---

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

Last edited by Paint CHiPs on 12-15-2004 at 05:43 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2000
Location: MadCo
Posts: 1801

I think Intelligent Design should be taught alongside Evolution in schools, as well as any theory that could possibly explain how we came to be here. I don't particularly subscribe to Evolution, nor really Intelligent Design, but I disagree with any curriculum that teaches one idea as fact, when it is a theory, just like every other one that we currently have. I'd prefer a curriculum that taught creationism, Intelligent Design, Evolution, or even Interstellar seeding, as long as it provided each with it's merits and detractions.

Homogenization of our lesson plans is part of why school is not interesting.

Melesse

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2001
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 4678

I have a couple of issues here, predictably.

First off, yes, teaching a psuedoscience as science is a bad idea.
There are hard and fast rules that separate "empirical science" from other topics of inquiry: refutability, scientific method, etc. Intelligent design is a theory about the origins of the universe but it is not a scientific theory.

That said, it does belong in any good "philosophy of science" type courses, because ID (and even creationism) raises some rather good questions about how science is done. Philosophers have been challenging the way we "do" science since the late 1800s, and yet students rarely see this. So they have this sort of dogmatic devotion to what they are taught without seeing the alternatives. You could just say "Well, the alternatives are junk," but isn't it up to the student to decide that? If you want to say that they are junk, then you are required to explain why.

But again, it doesn't belong in a science class like Physics 101 or anything.

Now...

The ACLU is challenging this on Church-and-State grounds. Bullshit. The ACLU's record on Church-and-State cases is hypocritical: this past year they argued, for instance, that Catholic Charities is not religious enough to be exempt from having to provide for contraception in their health care plan. Now they are ruling that an essentially secular, or at the very least religious but non-specific/non-denominational theory is too religious to be taught in schools. Essentially, they've got you coming AND going and their history is full of the same...The ACLU is a militant secularist organization, nuff said.

Finally, it strikes me as odd that in a so-called pluralist society in which no "creed" is supposed to have a monopoly on truth, we have powerful groups (e.g. the ACLU, the SPLC) which by their actions maintain that secularism is indeed normative and all different viewpoints are aberrations to be challenged and excluded from public life. Further evidence that the ACLU are a bunch of fucking wankers.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2003
Location: I cant say I buy this completely,
Posts: 2506

Evolution is not just a theory...it is a well developed theory. There are mountains of evidence that support it, a shitload of TESTABLE hypothesis that have helped to fashion its development as a theory and not even one serious scientist still argues against it. Not one.

Yes, I am aware that theories and our ideas in science are mutable, subject to change...this does not mean that some of them, like evolution, arent very well fleshed out. When people say evolution is a theory they are also implying that it is a theory which has withstood the ass pounding science has thrown at it...and with minor modifications, survived intact. They are not saying it is speculation...evolution is not speculation at this point...it is indeed FACT though some of its details are still under investigation.

If we are to teach every plausible theory about where we came from then I suggest we start with one I like to call The Dingleberry Theory of Human Devolution. See, I have no proof at all(just like ID) and my ideas arent testable(just like ID) but we can say its just as valid as science because my belief in it is so strong...yes, that should make up for all its logical shortcomings. Anyways, without getting too deep in the details I believe we, as a species, were dropped off the anus of a passing alien species as they took a bathroom break on our planet during an interstellar family road trip. Now, because they were so intelligent, their shit was sentient too and thus, humans were born. All other life on the planet is also a consequence of half dryed shit nuggets being deposited by aliens upon the earth, theres many different alien species. Notice that Ive just put foreward the same amount of factual evidence that the creationist use to support their BELIEFS...that is NONE. I have also provided us with a wonderful logical loophole...that is, the almighty negative. You cant disprove it, I cant prove it and so now it simply must be taught to children because look, ITS SO VIABLE WHEN WE REDUCE THE RULES OF SCIENCE TO 'I THINK THIS' instead of actually having to go through all the stupid hoops scientific inquiry has set up for us. Fuck method, I eat madness from now on...and we are what we eat.

Melese, Im not allowed to call people names in this forum...but Im calling you names right now...can you hear me through the screen? Guess what Im calling you...it starts with s...ends in d.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2001
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 4678

quote:

---

Originally posted by 3MTA3
Evolution is not just a theory...it is a well developed theory. There are mountains of evidence that support it, a shitload of TESTABLE hypothesis that have helped to fashion its development as a theory and not even one serious scientist still argues against it. Not one.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2003
Location: I cant say I buy this completely,
Posts: 2506

Ok, I am saying that the fact that evolution exists and takes place still is pretty much fact. Of course there is argument over the details...the basis for them remains...evolution is the process by which life has arisen on this planet, period.