Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Thanks Wandel . . . thanks everybody . . . no really, thank you . . . you're all wonderful . . . i'll be here all week . . . try the specials . . .

Judge Rules Against Pa. Biology Curriculum
Judge Rules Against Pa. Biology Curriculum
By MARTHA RAFFAELE, Associated Press Writer
12/20/05

"Intelligent design" cannot be mentioned in biology classes in a Pennsylvania public school district, a federal judge said Tuesday, ruling in one of the biggest courtroom clashes on evolution since the 1925 Scopes trial.

Dover Area School Board members violated the Constitution when they ordered that its biology curriculum must include the notion that life on Earth was produced by an unidentified intelligent cause, U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III said. Several members repeatedly lied to cover their motives even while professing religious beliefs, he said.

The school board policy, adopted in October 2004, was believed to have been the first of its kind in the nation.

"The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy," Jones wrote.

The board's attorneys had said members were seeking to improve science education by exposing students to alternatives to Charles Darwin's theory that evolution develops through natural selection. Intelligent-design proponents argue that the theory cannot fully explain the existence of complex life forms.

The plaintiffs challenging the policy argued that intelligent design amounts to a secular repackaging of creationism, which the courts have already ruled cannot be taught in public schools. The judge agreed.

"We find that the secular purposes claimed by the Board amount to a pretext for the Board's real purpose, which was to promote religion in the public school classroom," he wrote in his 139-page opinion.

The Dover policy required students to hear a statement about intelligent design before ninth-grade biology lessons on evolution. The statement said Charles Darwin's theory is "not a fact" and has inexplicable "gaps." It refers students to an intelligent-design textbook, "Of Pandas and People," for more information.

Jones wrote that he wasn't saying the intelligent design concept shouldn't be studied and discussed, saying its advocates "have bona fide and deeply held beliefs which drive their scholarly endeavors."

But, he wrote, "our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom."

The controversy divided the community and galvanized voters to oust eight incumbent school board members who supported the policy in the Nov. 8 school board election.

Said the judge: "It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy."

The board members were replaced by a slate of eight opponents who pledged to remove intelligent design from the science curriculum.

Eric Rothschild, the lead attorney for the families who challenged the policy, called the ruling "a real vindication for the parents who had the courage to stand up and say there was something wrong in their school district."

Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Law Center in Ann Arbor, Mich., which represented the school board, did not immediately return a telephone message seeking comment.

The dispute is the latest chapter in a long-running debate over the teaching of evolution dating back to the famous 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, in which Tennessee biology teacher John T. Scopes was fined $100 for violating a state law that forbade teaching evolution. The Tennessee Supreme Court reversed his conviction on a technicality, and the law was repealed in 1967.

Jones heard arguments in the fall during a six-week trial in which expert witnesses for each side debated intelligent design's scientific merits. Other witnesses, including current and former school board members, disagreed over whether creationism was discussed in board meetings months before the curriculum change was adopted.

The case is among at least a handful that have focused new attention on the teaching of evolution in the nation's schools.

Earlier this month, a federal appeals court in Georgia heard arguments over whether evolution disclaimer stickers placed in a school system's biology textbooks were unconstitutional. A federal judge in January ordered Cobb County school officials to immediately remove the stickers, which called evolution a theory, not a fact.

In November, state education officials in Kansas adopted new classroom science standards that call the theory of evolution into question.
-----------------------------------------------

On the Net:

Dover Area School District: http://www.dover.k12.pa.us

National Center for Science Education: http://www.ncseweb.org

Thomas More Law Center: http://www.thomasmore.org

Professor Williams wrote this in 1966-

The deepest crisis in modern literature is the division of experience into social and personal categories.It is now much more than a matter of emphasis.It is a rooted division,into which the flow of experience is directed,and from which,with their own kinds of vigour,the separated kinds of life grow.Intellectually,the division is fought out with the complete and confident apparatus of ideology:the individualist version confronts the collectivist version;sides are taken and armed.It is almost a mark of irresponsibility,the way things are going,not to take sides;not to insist on the unanswerable finality of this or that:the individual reality;the social reality.For the man who has not grasped THAT choice,the most withering contempt is reserved;he is not in touch with modern experience at all."

I have been single-handedly keeping the flag flying for the social reality in order to provide the thread with at least a modicum of intellectual credibility.The rest is simply a futile battle between two factions of the individualist wing which is so impossible to win that they have to bring a judge in to settle their meaningless dispute.(As if it does.How can it when the world is now ruled by social realities and Billy The Kid types went out years ago.)

We all know that Americans are rugged individualists but the plays Williams was discussing in that quote were authored by Eugene O'Neill,Tennessee Williams and Arthur Miller.

Your conceit is appalling . . . your "contribution" to this thread has been usually opaque to the point of nonsense, and completely irrelevant in nine out of ten cases.

That is a function of the divide between the individualists and the social realists I'm afraid.And name calling is a standard technique of the anti-intellectual.

I called you no names, so your unsupported and unsupportable contention with regard to "name-calling" would not apply to me, even if it were true, which you have failed to demonstrate is the case.

Based on Setanta's quote vs Spendius I can only reach the conclusion that spendius thinks characterizing posts of another person is name calling which spendius then proceeds to do himself.

You're in for it now, Parados . . . the superman of social reality is gonna get ya . . .

Gee-

Have I invented a new technique.

You're my hero.

I especially liked the following quote from Judge Jones:

"The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial."

Well done Ros and Setanta and all you rationalists (not sure about Spendy but feeling charitable) who WHACKED THEM id iots. And Judge Jones. And Jesus and my Mother and God. There is a god you know. It is thus proved. QED.

merry Christmas

ros-

That was a bit of a sweeping statement you quoted from the learned judge.

I reckon I could have made him see it differently with a real factual backdrop conjoured up for him.

What makes me laugh is that the kids wouldn't have taken a blind bit of notice when the 3 paragraphs of whadyacallit was read out.Mixed class 16 yr olds I gather.Assuming nobody had drawn their attention to it I mean in a very attenuated form.I suppose part of the backdrop in a middle class neighbourhood is that kids listen to what an argumentative bunch of old stagers have to say in a classroom of monkeys on the first morning of a mixed 16 yr old's biology course.In 3 paragraphs read off a card in a fast low monotone by an SDer.It might as well have been in Urdu.

And they're $5 million,and counting,light in the purse.Although it has to be admitted that the $5m didn't just vanish.It changed positions.

I detect the hand that used to rock the cradle.

There's just been an item on our main news about the case.My,my,Dover looks a swell place.There's nothing like having made it to get the boredom to set in.

Anyway-Round 1 looks like it's over.Champ was a bit sluggish.He takes a bit to loosen up after a long lay off.

I believe, spendi, what you characterize as "Round 1" in fact equates to a judge's decision for a technical knockout - this fight is over. To re-enter the ring, the ID-iots are gonna hafta come up with a brand new contender; their just-disposed-of "argument" ain't got no fight left in in it.

sounds like spendius has a bit of the ague, is the man dilerious, whot?


There is a period of time that will pass before the "behind the scenes " and other tales of the case can be told. As I understand this time has to do with filing or indicating that there will be filed , an appeal. I seriously doubt that one will be filed and an agreement will be reached re "will there be any cost recovery sought.?"

Now, the next "last stand " for Phil Johnson and his gang, is "Teaching the Controversy" so Im sure the tack that was taken in georgia and KAnsas have been cynically proposed with that in mind.
Im glAD THAT jUDGE jONES USED 2 or his 3 possible areas of findings
1 That ID is a religiously based concept is now defined by a court

2 Also, that the motives of the proponents of ID are based upon religion not science

This pretty much shuts the door even if Tommy More Center wishes to further this case (without a client, because the new school board of Dover is ID-free as of Nov 8 2005).



Not a great day for neoCreationism (ID)

Read the news re the case......restrained wild joy.....I have no doubt the forces of darkness, ignorance and superstition will continue the battle to darken the intellects of America and beyond...but meanwhile, YAAAAAAY!!!!!!!

I totally support the forces of darkness, ignorance and superstition. That's wot got me where I am today.

I understand dwolan's euphoria.She's a lady.Ladies must be over the moon.No more sin.It's official.

I don't understand these guys though.They must have a desire to get their necks wrung.SD and Ladies.That's a combination to conjure with.

timber wrote-



Well-what do you expect from a bourgeois argument?That's one where presentation takes precedence over substance.Like with tart's knicker's curtains.Which most of the Board's legal representitives probably have up on their windows.And snow white serviettes with pink frilly edgings when they are at nosheroonies.
They are closet SADs actually.(Scientific Advanced Design).