I'm lying when I say trust me
8th June 2004
A court in the US has ruled against the teaching of "intelligent design" alongside Darwin's theory of evolution. A group of parents in the Pennsylvania town of Dover had taken the school board to court for demanding biology classes not teach evolution as fact. The authorities wanted to introduce the idea that Earth's life was too complicated to have evolved on its own. Judge John Jones ruled the school board had violated the constitutional ban on teaching religion in public schools. The 11 parents who brought the case argued that teaching intelligent design (ID) was effectively teaching creationism, which is banned. They complained that ID - which argues life must have been helped to develop by an unseen power - is tantamount to religious education. The separation of church and state is enshrined in the US constitution. The school board argued they had sought to improve science education by exposing pupils to alternatives to Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. But Judge Jones said he had determined that ID was not science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents". In a 139-page written ruling, the judge said: "Our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom." He accused school board members of disguising their true motives for introducing the ID policy. "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 said. He banned any future implementation of the policy in Dover schools. The case, the first of its kind, sets an important precedent in a country where several states have adopted the teaching of ID, reports the BBC's James Coomerasamy in Washington. Ironically, he adds, it is a somewhat academic ruling in the Dover area since parents there voted last month to replace the school board members who brought in the policy. That move provoked US TV evangelist Pat Robertson to warn the town was invoking the wrath of God. A lawyer for the parents said the ruling was a "real vindication" for those families who challenged the school board.
Only one word can sum this up: GOOD.
A good decision in my opinion. Although I agree that the evolution theory still contains some holes it is at least a scientific theory, compared to the religious pseudo-scientific ID theory.
Actually the vast majority of teh guys behind ID are not religious at all! many have just found flaws in the theory of evolution that CANNOT be answered by its theories. The flagella motor is a prime example of this!
MephistophelesAlthough I agree that the evolution theory still contains some holes it is at least a scientific theory, compared to the religious pseudo-scientific ID theory.
Of course its a scientific theory it was made up by a scientist, just like the Earth being flat was a scientific theory! Before you label something "religious pseudo-scientific", conduct your research a bit more thoroughly so you know for sure waht are talking about, otherwise your just as foolish as that ill-informed judge!
But isn't that giving a linear view of life/creation? I don't particularly agree with intelligent design, but I do think that people should be shown different theories on life. Calling it pseudo-scientific is wrong, Darwins theory is just that a theory. It makes good points, but there are holes in it. Much like the intelligent design theory.
08'aIgnorance is not an excuse
28th November 2003
Keep intelligent design in the religion classes and Darwins evolution theory in the biology classes. It's simple as that.
Both are theorys, and i side in sort of a hybrid fashion. God may exist, but even in a world where he does, darwin can too. The thing about darwin is it tries to explain why evolution happens, instead of just saying someone made it that way. Its kinda similar to saying that blacks should be slaves cause the kings said so. similar anyway. Darwins more of a reach for understanding rather than pretty much saying god said let there be light. theorys shoudl explain why, and id doesnt really do that. i think thats probably a big reason for the desicion.
Intelligent design "theory" is nothing but religious propoganda. It is not based on any scientific facts
Evolution theory, or any theory, are based on facts that can be shown and proven.
The court are fools... The purpose of the seperation between church and state was for keeping the clergy from controling the government from the inside. Not for the purpose of maintaining the ignorance of man.
And this issue has nothing to do with government control. Its about education. This is nothing more than a blatant attempt to stifle and snuff out intelligent thought..."OR DARK AGES"
I'm lying when I say trust me
8th June 2004
Religion has no place in schools, unless its a relgious school.
Mast3rofPuppetsKeep intelligent design in the religion classes and Darwins evolution theory in the biology classes. It's simple as that.
Indeed, it shouldn't be that hard.