Intelligent Design. Genesis, Darwin, or something in between?

defending the First Amendment against the Christian right ...

... because if Jews don't speak out, they'll think we don't mind

Web JewsOnFirst

Optional Member Code

Please email us
(click here)
catcher@JewsOnFirst.org

And "bookmark" us at
JewsOnFirst.org

Jews on First
P.O. Box 33821
Washington DC 20033

310-553-1146

Intelligent design

Genesis, Darwin or something in between? Governor's speech brings contentious debate to Kentucky

By Dan Hassert, Cincinnati.com January 14, 2006

Explain how humans came to be:

(a) God took six days to create us exactly as we exist today.

(b) Environmental influences guided our evolution from a single-cell creature by a biological process called natural selection.

(c) Humans developed through the deliberate direction of an intelligent force, because life is so complex that random influences could not have designed us.

The argument over human creation has spawned a national debate that has raged inside classrooms and courtrooms, across the Internet and throughout polls and state capitols.

Kentucky has been mostly an observer in that debate, but with 42 words near the end of a 41-minute speech last Monday, Gov. Ernie Fletcher cranked up the volume of discourse in the Bluegrass State.

Fletcher, who is both a medical doctor and an ordained Baptist minister, used his televised State of the Commonwealth address to encourage Kentucky's schools to teach a concept called intelligent design, (basically the answer "C'' above), a relatively recent movement derided by critics as creationism in disguise.

"This is not a question about faith or religion. It's about self-evident truth,'' Fletcher said.

The governor's endorsement didn't include a formal proposal and likely won't, since state law already specifically gives free rein to teachers to teach related creationism as an alternative to the scientific theory of evolution (even though the responsibility for curriculum falls to local school councils). Spokeswoman Jodi Whitaker said Fletcher would not be pushing to mandate the teaching; a Fletcher aide added that the governor was simply touting his beliefs.

"Part of the responsibility I have as governor is to use the bully pulpit, and that's what I did,'' Fletcher explained later.

But his comments reverberated around the commonwealth.

Scientists sent a letter of protest, rights groups threatened to sue if religious beliefs were promoted in the classroom, legislators weighed in carefully and observers dissected Fletcher's political strategy.

All agree - the debate is only going to intensify.

"What 2004 showed us is when religion and politics mix, they create a fiery blend,'' said Ryan Lee Teten, a political science professor at Northern Kentucky University.

Teten said Fletcher accomplished two things. One, he got a "pop'' from his conservative core, a must for a leader in trouble politically. And two, he floated a trial balloon. The governor is trying out issues to use for the coming gubernatorial campaign, and was able - with little risk to himself - to begin the process of figuring out whether intelligent design resonates in Kentucky.

While evolution as an issue doesn't carry the same weight as same-sex marriage, abortion, display of the 10 Commandments and flag-burning, it seems to be growing.

In Ohio, a motion to amend guidelines that critics say promote intelligent design in schools failed 9-8 after a contentious hearing before the Ohio Board of Education on Tuesday. Sponsors say they'll try again, and soon.

Ohio is one of only five states that require evolution to be taught critically - saluting both its scientific strengths and weaknesses, said Casey Luskin of the Discovery Institute, a leading intelligent design proponent.

A public school near Bakersfield, Calif., was sued recently for offering an elective class whose curriculum salutes both intelligent design and creationism.

A federal judge ruled in December that it was unconstitutional for a school district in Pennsylvania to teach intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in biology class, saying it was a religious viewpoint. Intelligent design advocates recoiled at the judge's harsh denouncement and broad ruling.

Like Fletcher, Texas Gov. Rick Perry recently said he favored teaching intelligent design.

Periodic Gallup polls show as many as 38 percent of Americans believe that evolution was guided by God, although other polls register 18 percent (Pew Research Center) and 13 percent (NBC News). More than 40 percent believe in creationism.

What is it?

Intelligent design preaches the philosophy that the complexity of life points to the presence of an intelligent creator. Advocates insist that it's credible science theory based on observation and supported by recurring codes in natural structures, similar to those in computer software. They also claim serious doubt exists in the scientific community about evolution's credibility.

But science organizations scoff, saying science is solidly behind evolutionist Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection. They call intelligent design creationism repackaged to get around a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that outlawed teaching the literal Biblical story of creation as science. They say they don't mind religious beliefs but object when faith tries to pass itself off as science.

Miriam Steinitz Kannan, who teaches microbiology at Northern Kentucky University, said the message that intelligent design conveys - that science is inadequate in explaining the natural world - is frightening. She compares it to suggestions that cancer and HIV are punishments from God.

"The moment we throw faith in there and tell students not to think, then we're in trouble,'' Kannan said.

She blames intelligent design and creationism in part for the shortage of scientists in the United States, saying bright students are turned off by what they learn at home and sometimes in school. She said few of her students arrive with a good grasp of evolution; worse still is that she has to "un-teach'' them, she said.

"The main thing we need to communicate to students is how science works,'' said Kannan, who is president of the Kentucky Academy of Science. "Scientists are constantly questioning and follow the scientific method. If you see a fact, you should be able to propose a hypothesis and that hypothesis should be testable.

"Here we're going backwards - starting with a fact and looking for an explanation.''

The academy - which boasts 700 members - sent letters outlining its position to legislators after Fletcher's speech. Its allies include groups that say teaching intelligent design violates the U.S. Constitution.

"The state should not be promoting one religious belief over any other religious belief,'' said Beth Wilson, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Kentucky, calling Fletcher "irresponsible."

Joseph Conn, spokesman for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said his group will sue if schools begin teaching intelligent design. "The governor would be advised to read (the Dover ruling) and stop giving bad legal advice,'' he said. Intelligent design belongs in a current events class or one on comparative religions, he said.

A non-issue

Complicating the issue, however, is a state law that specifically permits teachers in public schools to teach the Bible story of creation as an alternative to evolution, "thereby affording students a choice as to which such theory to accept.''

But state education officials say they know anecdotally few teachers do. Other than some classes on comparative religions, officials said they knew of only one teacher - at Lloyd Memorial High School in Erlanger - who teaches creationism in science classes. Biology teacher Jerry Gels told reporters this week he included the Biblical account of creation - and some from African, Asian and American Indian sources - alongside Darwin as a salute to his students' conservative backgrounds.

Brad Hughes, spokesman for the Kentucky School Board Association, said his agency has never received a single inquiry about intelligent design. He said the law allowing creationism to be taught seems to be in conflict with a more recent law that gives total authority to set curriculum to local site-based councils.

Lisa Gross, a spokeswoman for the state Department of Education, said state curriculum guidelines simply don't mention the word "evolution'' but include its general concepts. "As far as educators go, it's been a non-issue,'' she said.

Catholic schools in the Diocese of Covington teach evolution combined with a less rigid form of intelligent design, said Lawrence Bowman, director of Catholic education and superintendent of schools. Catholics believe that faith and reason can co-exist: Provable scientific evidence doesn't mean that God didn't have an impact - he gave us free will and a soul, Bowman said.

"God is the 'prime mover.' He puts these things in motion and allows them to progress. Divine intelligence is imprinted on everything,'' Bowman said. "Whether he was involved step by step by step or not doesn't matter.''

Luskin said intelligent design proponents differ on that "step by step'' question. He said the Discovery Institute is aware of no systematic teaching of its tenets but knows of individual teachers who do so or fear they would be fired if they did.

Still, he said the institute would rather teachers who don't understand intelligent design - or lump it in with creationism - to avoid teaching it.

An official for Answers in Genesis, which is building a creation museum in Boone County, agreed. Creationism is a straightforward, literal interpretation of the Bible and grounded 100 percent on faith, and intelligent design advocates "want nothing to do with us,'' said Mark Looy, chief communications officer and vice president of outreach.

Looy shared Luskin's enthusiasm for Fletcher's stance. "Any time you encourage a teacher to teach two sides of a controversial issue, it's not only academically fair it (also) encourages critical thinking,'' Looy said.

What next

Luskin said the Discovery Institute does not want to mandate that intelligent design be taught because of confusion over its beliefs and because it would create a legal and political fight. The group instead wants states to pass academic freedom legislation to allay teachers' fears for their jobs and to require that evolution be taught critically, with its weaknesses pointed out, he said.

But it's unclear what will happen.

Both Senate President David Williams, a Republican, and House Speaker Jody Richards, a Democrat, said the matter was best left to local school boards. Several schools said they had no idea whether Fletcher's comments would inspire individual teachers to change their instruction.

So far, however, teachers seem to be against it.

Rep. Dennis Keene, D-Wilder, said he has received at least four letters from teachers who oppose any effort to impose intelligent design teaching on schools. He hasn't received any in support.

Fair Use Statement: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.