NationStates Jolt Archive

COMMENTARY: This case will probably wind up at the Supreme Court. I'll be following it rather closely.


A Web of Faith,
Law and Science in Evolution Suit (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/26/education/26evolution.html?th&emc=th)

By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
Published: September 26, 2005

DOVER, Pa., Sept. 23 - Sheree Hied, a mother of five who believes that God created the earth and its creatures, was grateful when her school board here voted last year to require high school biology classes to hear about "alternatives" to evolution, including the theory known as intelligent design.

With the new political empowerment of religious conservatives, challenges to evolution are popping up with greater frequency in schools, courts and legislatures. But the Dover case, which begins Monday in Federal District Court in Harrisburg, is the first direct challenge to a school district that has tried to mandate the teaching of intelligent design.

What happens here could influence communities across the country that are considering whether to teach intelligent design in the public schools, and the case, regardless of the verdict, could end up before the Supreme Court.

Dover, a rural, mostly blue-collar community of 22,000 that is 20 miles south of Harrisburg, had school board members willing to go to the mat over issue. But people here are well aware that they are only the excuse for a much larger showdown in the culture wars.

"It was just our school board making one small decision," Mrs. Hied said, "but it was just received with such an uproar."

For Mrs. Hied, a meter reader, and her husband, Michael, an office manager for a local bus and transport company, the Dover school board's argument - that teaching intelligent design is a free-speech issue - has a strong appeal.

"I think we as Americans, regardless of our beliefs, should be able to freely access information, because people fought and died for our freedoms," Mrs. Hied said over a family dinner last week at their home, where the front door is decorated with a small bell and a plaque proclaiming, "Let Freedom Ring."

But in a split-level house on the other side of Main Street, at a desk flanked by his university diplomas, Steven Stough was on the Internet late the other night, keeping track of every legal maneuver in the case. Mr. Stough, who teaches life science to seventh graders in a nearby district, is one of the 11 parents suing the Dover district. For him the notion of teaching "alternatives" to evolution is a hoax.

"You can dress up intelligent design and make it look like science, but it just doesn't pass muster," said Mr. Stough, a Republican whose idea of a fun family vacation is visiting fossil beds and natural history museums. "In science class, you don't say to the students, 'Is there gravity, or do you think we have rubber bands on our feet?' "

Evolution finds that life evolved over billions of years through the processes of mutation and natural selection, without the need for supernatural interventions. It is the foundation of biological science, with no credible challenges within the scientific community. Without it, the plaintiffs say, students could never make sense of topics as varied as AIDS and extinction.

Advocates on both sides of the issue have lined up behind the case, often calling it Scopes II, in reference to the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial that was the last century's great face-off over evolution.

On the evolutionists' side is a legal team put together by the American Civil Liberties Union and Americans United for Separation of Church and State. These groups want to put intelligent design itself on trial and discredit it so thoroughly that no other school board would dare authorize teaching it.

Witold J. Walczak, legal director of the A.C.L.U. of Pennsylvania, said the plaintiffs would call six experts in history, theology, philosophy of science and science to show that no matter the perspective, "intelligent design is not science because it does not meet the ground rules of science, is not based on natural explanations, is not testable."

[ This article is two pages long. Read the rest of the article here (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/26/education/26evolution.html?pagewanted=2&th&emc=th) ]

Why must you people do everything through courts?

COMMENTARY: This case will probably wind up at the Supreme Court. I'll be following it rather closely.

I think you'll be the only one. It's almost of no interest in NS. :)

Re-Inherit the Wind?



Oh c'mon, somone was going to make that joke.




okay, maybe not...

The U.S. is lucky enough to actually have a judicial branch of government. That's why.

That and 98% of the population are lawyers :D

Fucking people … I am starting to get extremely depressed with the idiocy growing in America (I am not normally like this but oh my fucking god cant those people understand that ID is not science it does not belong in the science class room period)

Interesting, I hope their strategy of putting ID itself on trial as having nothing to do with science works. It really is misleading to call it an 'alternative'.

Why must you people do everything through courts?
Because that's the way the government was set up. It's called "the rule of law." :)

Hm... let me guess... The author of said article would prefer ID in the classroom... :rolleyes:

Why must you people do everything through courts?


Because if we don't people call us trigger-happy americans?

>.>;

Orrr because people would rather those who know what they're doing fight for their cause.

The U.S. is lucky enough to actually have a judicial branch of government. That's why.

That's not unique in any sense.

That and 98% of the population are lawyers :D

The horror.

I think you'll be the only one. It's almost of no interest in NS. :)
Uh huh. Riiiiight! :rolleyes:

Fucking people … I am starting to get extremely depressed with the idiocy growing in America (I am not normally like this but oh my fucking god cant those people understand that ID is not science it does not belong in the science class room period)

I agree 100%

I have yet to comment on the evolution/ID debate in any thread, but I think I'm probably going to have to come back here later and pick this article to pieces.

Because if we don't people call us trigger-happy americans?>.>;

There are ways of dealing with issues other than through courts and that don't involve weapons. :eek:

Orrr because people would rather those who know what they're doing fight for their cause.

This is a cause that could be fought in other venues than through courts. Well, at least where I live. The problem might be that there is no other venue in the US, which would be sad indeed.

There are ways of dealing with issues other than through courts and that don't involve weapons. :eek:

I know, I know, I just couldn't resist. ;)


This is a cause that could be fought in other venues than through courts. Well, at least where I live. The problem might be that there is no other venue in the US, which would be sad indeed.

Weelll... I suppose they could go through the school board. But it'd go to a vote and insanity and parents being parents. :eek:

Fucking people … I am starting to get extremely depressed with the idiocy growing in America (I am not normally like this but oh my fucking god cant those people understand that ID is not science it does not belong in the science class room period)

I take my hat off to you, sir.

So, how does everyone think the Supreme Court'll rule?

Because no one gets or thinks my film references are funny...
But people here are well aware that they are only the excuse for a much larger showdown in the culture wars.
Yeah? Maybe you could go out of your way to outline that distinction.

For Mrs. Hied, a meter reader, and her husband, Michael, an office manager for a local bus and transport company, the Dover school board's argument - that teaching intelligent design is a free-speech issue - has a strong appeal.

"I think we as Americans, regardless of our beliefs, should be able to freely access information, because people fought and died for our freedoms," Mrs. Hied said over a family dinner last week at their home, where the front door is decorated with a small bell and a plaque proclaiming, "Let Freedom Ring."
Why, that's downright, salt of the Earth, 'Merican right there, that is.

But in a split-level house on the other side of Main Street,
Split level, on the other side of Main Street, who does this guy think he is?
at a desk flanked by his university diplomas,
Learnin'! Get him!
Steven Stough was on the Internet late the other night,
Least that's what he told his wife...alright, that one was just for me.
keeping track of every legal maneuver in the case. Mr. Stough, who teaches life science to seventh graders in a nearby district, is one of the 11 parents suing the Dover district. For him the notion of teaching "alternatives" to evolution is a hoax.
Well, clearly this is an Ivory Tower kinda cat. We know how much money those Junior High Science teachers rake in....

Wow, this is off to a great start.

Well, clearly this is an Ivory Tower kinda cat. We know how much money those Junior High Science teachers rake in....

Wow, this is off to a great start.I can't believe you missed this:
"You can dress up intelligent design and make it look like science, but it just doesn't pass muster," said Mr. Stough, a Republican whose idea of a fun family vacation is visiting fossil beds and natural history museums.Show what kind of abominable person Mr. Stough is right there. Can't he play baseball with his kids, like everyone else? :rolleyes:

Interesting, I hope their strategy of putting ID itself on trial as having nothing to do with science works. It really is misleading to call it an 'alternative'.
I totally agree.

Sigh... If this goes the way I fear it's going to go, I may have to start seriously considering home-school for my son. There's enough idiocy in the schools as it is without adding "intelligent design" to the madness. (Luckily, my wife comes from a family of teachers, so I'll have lots of resources to draw upon.)

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: and again :rolleyes:

Why must you people do everything through courts?
Because they know they have no leg to stand on if they'd follow the normal path of scientific theory acceptance.
I've yet to find a scientific journal that has published an ID theory or an ID website kicking and screaming that their theory has been surpressed by said journals with scientific reasons why it shouldn't have been surpressed (just the usual conspiracy ramblings about all scientists working together to keep ID out). Instead the ID people are doing an appeal to the masses and government to force their belief through as science.

All the ID people have to do to get their theory accepted is make a prediction using their theory that isn't made by evolution theory and be proven right. That is all. There will be a lot of verifying due to the current reputation of ID. But once other scientists confirm the ID prediction with their own observation will be the moment that the current evolution theory gets replaced with ID as the new evolution theory.

No need for courts, no need for wrangling debates about the most minor nitpicks you can think of, no demagoguery. Just 1 prediction using their theory that isn't made by evolution theory that can be checked against by other scientists.

Sigh... If this goes the way I fear it's going to go, I may have to start seriously considering home-school for my son. There's enough idiocy in the schools as it is without adding "intelligent design" to the madness. (Luckily, my wife comes from a family of teachers, so I'll have lots of resources to draw upon.)

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: and again :rolleyes:

If i ever have children and am living in the US, I plan on home schooling. Honestly, public schools just aren't worth the hassle anymore.

Thank god that i live in Britian! This amdness isn't happening over here.

Seriously, how much everdence do people need before they'll accept that evoloution is true? I have no problem with them baliving in god, or intellagent design or whatever, but keep at your home, please!

But if Intellagent design is going to be taught in clasrooms, why not the hindu version of how life began, or the Buddist, or maybe we should just have a scientific theory in a scince classroom, and relion in RE lessions?

Seriously, how much everdence do people need before they'll accept that evoloution is true? In case you haven't noticed, that's a trick question. (In fact, you'll probably find people with the exact same beliefs in Britain, with the exception that there's a lot less of them, which explains why they have so little media attention).

How about they teach a Lab Chemistry class while presenting "alternatives" for those intelligent designers? You know... alternative safety goggles made of faith, for example.

Re-Inherit the Wind?



Oh c'mon, somone was going to make that joke.




okay, maybe not...

That is the funniest thing you could possibly have said about this. (but I am a little upset you got there before me).

Seriously, how much everdence do people need before they'll accept that evoloution is true? I have no problem with them baliving in god, or intellagent design or whatever, but keep at your home, please!

Some people never will accept it. There's another thread on this topic in the forum where someone simply said "Creation is in the Bible, that's all I need to know!" What can you do in the face of such willful ignorance? If people absolutely refuse to deal with facts, there's no way to have a rational argument with them.

But if Intellagent design is going to be taught in clasrooms, why not the hindu version of how life began, or the Buddist, or maybe we should just have a scientific theory in a scince classroom, and relion in RE lessions?

Ah, but you don't get it! Those are false religions. The Christian version of creation is the only true one! :rolleyes:

Seriously, these people are so sure they are right that they are blind to their own hypocrisy. They have the one and only truth, the Bible (how do they know that? Their Bible tells them so!) Circular logic, far from being a logical fallacy to them, is the only kind of logic that holds water in their minds.

Argh. It's frustrating, but we can't just ignore these people and hope they'll go away. They won't. We have to actively work to keep them from taking over. My head hurts.
:headbang:

So, how does everyone think the Supreme Court'll rule?

The way it stands now? They'll rule in favor of ID and I will be looking for work outside the US. If the Supreme Court goes for this, it will show that we are truly a confederacy of complete and utter fecking morons!

Some people never will accept it. There's another thread on this topic in the forum where someone simply said "Creation is in the Bible, that's all I need to know!" What can you do in the face of such willful ignorance? If people absolutely refuse to deal with facts, there's no way to have a rational argument with them.

I know I've been on countless threads where I've presented the facts of evoloution, he it all works and stuff and then merley get a 'your lying' back at me, or (even worse) 'Your a satenist/fool/idiot. And I won't balive coz the bible sez so.

Nowt you cna do about it


Ah, but you don't get it! Those are false religions. The Christian version of creation is the only true one! :rolleyes:

Seriously, these people are so sure they are right that they are blind to their own hypocrisy. They have the one and only truth, the Bible (how do they know that? Their Bible tells them so!) Circular logic, far from being a logical fallacy to them, is the only kind of logic that holds water in their minds.

Argh. It's frustrating, but we can't just ignore these people and hope they'll go away. They won't. We have to actively work to keep them from taking over. My head hurts.
:headbang:
Me too

The way it stands now? They'll rule in favor of ID and I will be looking for work outside the US. If the Supreme Court goes for this, it will show that we are truly a confederacy of complete and utter fecking morons!

Nah, they will not. I'm confident they'll reject the claim.

So, how does everyone think the Supreme Court'll rule?

If the IDers lose in the appelate court, the SC won't even hear the case.

If they win...well, flip a coin. :(

The way it stands now? They'll rule in favor of ID and I will be looking for work outside the US. If the Supreme Court goes for this, it will show that we are truly a confederacy of complete and utter fecking morons!

No, I can't believe they would rule in favour of ID, separation of church & state and the fact that ID is not science. However if they do rule in favour of teaching ID in schools, it will only prove my point that the USA is slowly trying to move towards a theocracy and not a democracy.. (Yes, I know it's a Republic) ..

Well, I said I'd be back, so here I am...

...and here we go...

...the Dover school board's argument - that teaching intelligent design is a free-speech issue - has a strong appeal.

"I think we as Americans, regardless of our beliefs, should be able to freely access information, because people fought and died for our freedoms,"

And here lies the fundamental problem that these ID supporters have.

NOBODY is saying that people shouldn't have access to information about Intelligent Design.

What Evolutionists ARE saying is that ID has no place in a public school science classroom.

That doesn't prevent these parents from enrolling their kids in private schools, or homeschooling, or just finding a couple of websites and explaining the concept to their children themselves.

But no...they have to mandate their own religious beliefs through the govermnent...what a crock.

...intelligent design is not science because it does not meet the ground rules of science, is not based on natural explanations, is not testable

I don't know how many times it's going to take before IDers finally get this little fact implanted in their skulls.

If you really want this concept (not theory) taught in public schools, then put it in a world religion class or some other social studies class where it belongs.

The defense plans to introduce leading design theorists like Michael J. Behe, a professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University, and education experts who will testify that "allowing students to be aware of the controversy is good pedagogy because it develops critical thinking," Mr. Thompson said.

I'm sorry, but there are thousands of ways to encourage critical thinking that don't involve teaching a religiously based concept in a science classroom.

Your going to need a much better argument than that.

The legal battle came to a head on Oct. 18 last year when the Dover school board voted 6 to 3 to require ninth-grade biology students to listen to a brief statement saying that there was a controversy over evolution, that intelligent design is a competing theory

Intelligent design is NOT a theory. Keep hammering it in, maybe it will take.

When I took biology in high school, there was no mention of a concept such as ID. My teachers made simple statements to the effect that evolution may go against the religious teachings of some students, but that it was not the place of science to debate matters of faith, and that they were free to withdraw from the course and take a different science course, such as chemistry or physics.

So apparently, it is not the place of science to debate matters of faith...but it is the place of faith to debate matters of science. :rolleyes:

The 11 plaintiffs are a diverse group, unacquainted before the case, who say that parents, and not the school, should be in charge of their children's religious education.

Yet another compelling argument against ID.

Apparently parents who support ID are too lazy to try and teach their own children about matters of faith...otherwise why have someone else do it for you? :confused:

The Supreme Court ruled in 1987 that teaching creation science in public schools was unconstitutional because it was based on religion. So the plaintiffs will try to prove that intelligent design is creationism in a new package.

Bingo.

Mr. Thompson said his side would prove that intelligent design was not creationism because it did not mention God or the Bible and never posited the creator's identity.

"It's clear they are two different theories," Mr. Thompson said. "Creationism normally starts with the Holy Scripture, the Book of Genesis, then you develop a scientific theory that supports it, while intelligent design looks at the same kind of empirical data that any scientist looks at," and concludes that complex mechanisms in nature "appear designed because it is designed."

This whole argument that ID is somehow not Christian is absolute bullshit.

You don't see people who are Muslim, Hindu or any other religion arguing for this to be taught in science classes, do you?

Didn't think so.

Also, I know of no scientific theory that supports Creationism.

"...appear designed because it is designed."???

Does this idiot listen to himself when he speaks?

A THEORY must be proven.

This very statement shows that ID has no intention of providing actual proof, therefore it is not a theory.

Again...keep hammering it in.

A twist in the case is that a leading proponent of intelligent design, the Discovery Institute, based in Seattle, removed one of its staff members from the Dover school board's witness list and opposed the board's action from the start.

Really??

Sounds like someone actually read about that Supreme Court case back in '87

---

I know that whole post probably sounded hostile, but I've refrained from commenting on this issue the entire time I've been on this forum, and the underlined comment pissed me off to no end, thus releasing pent up frustration.

You'll never see me comment on this issue again. :)

Anyone in favor of teaching ID in schools, are flat-out lying.

They know damn well that there is no science inherent with in it.

What there IS...is faith.

Thats the crux of the matter.
They want God, and faith to be taught.

The textbook for ID, is none other than the bible.
Sorry folks, thankfully in this country, we have laws against teaching that sort of stuff in public schools.

This is nothing more than another way for Right-Wing Christian Crazies to stick thier noses in as many peoples business as possible.
If any of the aforementioned crazies would like to discuss the issue, Im listening.
I'll gladly tell where you went crazy.

Anyone in favor of teaching ID in schools, are flat-out lying.

They know damn well that there is no science inherent with in it.

What there IS...is faith.

Thats the crux of the matter.
They want God, and faith to be taught.

The textbook for ID, is none other than the bible.
Sorry folks, thankfully in this country, we have laws against teaching that sort of stuff in public schools.

This is nothing more than another way for Right-Wing Christian Crazies to stick thier noses in as many peoples business as possible.
If any of the aforementioned crazies would like to discuss the issue, Im listening.
I'll gladly tell where you went crazy.


Agreed … how this idea can even be entertained is beyond me

Haha! Free speech issue... :)

"I think we as Americans, regardless of our beliefs, should be able to freely access information, because people fought and died for our freedoms." That made me laugh.

The textbook for ID, is none other than the bible.
Seriously? Or are you just making a point?

Seriously? Or are you just making a point?

If we start from the premise that the bible is the word of God revealed to man, then he's right.

If we don't, then, er, erm...

oh, i've got it

1. The universe is too complex to have happened by accident, therefore it must have been designed
2. It says in the bible God designed it

therefore

God must have designed the universe


What happens if you remove point 1 above? I think the argument stays the same

No, seriously. I want to know which part of Intelligent Design they propose has anything to do with biology.

EDIT: Oh, I suppose I could read the other two pages of the article *grumble*hope it's there*grumble.*

No, seriously. I want to know which part of Intelligent Design they propose has anything to do with biology.

EDIT: Oh, I suppose I could read the other two pages of the article *grumble*hope it's there*grumble.*
So do I

Nah, they will not. I'm confident they'll reject the claim.

Two words for you on that...actually four...Chief Justice John Roberts...

I think ID has already won...

No, I can't believe they would rule in favour of ID, separation of church & state and the fact that ID is not science. However if they do rule in favour of teaching ID in schools, it will only prove my point that the USA is slowly trying to move towards a theocracy and not a democracy.. (Yes, I know it's a Republic) ..

I wouldn't even say it's a Republic...it's a Capitalist Oligarchy.

But the fact is that the rich, in order to get more power, will align themselves with the church so that the people will like "all the nice church going boys in charge" (my gram's comment, not mine).

Seperation of church & state is an ideal not commonly practiced in the US (if a judge can make a monument to the 10 commandments and keep it on public property, the Supreme Court will say yes to teaching ID.)

It's sad but true.

I wouldn't even say it's a Republic...it's a Capitalist Oligarchy.

But the fact is that the rich, in order to get more power, will align themselves with the church so that the people will like "all the nice church going boys in charge" (my gram's comment, not mine).

Seperation of church & state is an ideal not commonly practiced in the US (if a judge can make a monument to the 10 commandments and keep it on public property, the Supreme Court will say yes to teaching ID.)

It's sad but true.
In a very real sense, most countries on the planet are now either economic oligarchies or dictatorships. Sad commentary on human nature, yes? :headbang:

Fucking people … I am starting to get extremely depressed with the idiocy growing in America (I am not normally like this but oh my fucking god cant those people understand that ID is not science it does not belong in the science class room period)


DOVER, Pa., Sept. 23 - Sheree Hied, a mother of five who believes that God created the earth and its creatures, was grateful when her school board here voted last year to require high school biology classes to hear about "alternatives" to evolution, including the theory known as intelligent design...

...Dover, a rural, mostly blue-collar community of 22,000 that is 20 miles south of Harrisburg, had school board members willing to go to the mat over issue. But people here are well aware that they are only the excuse for a much larger showdown in the culture wars.


You liberal elitists, always want'n to turn our kids into over-educated commie liberals ;)

Yes, I'm aware that the politician that they quoted on the issue was a Republican. It's a shame that Republicans of that stripe haven't had any power within the party in the last 10 years. Things like this are why I can confidently claim that this country has a loony right, but no loony left.

Re-Inherit the Wind?



Oh c'mon, somone was going to make that joke.




okay, maybe not...

Sound the trumpet, beat the drum!

It's time for another MONKEY TRIAL! Yay! ^___^