Judgment Day: Intelligent Design On Trial

I. Acceptance of Creation is growing in spite of overwhelming evidence proving Evolution There is no easy resolution for whats true and evolution or creationism. It is a complex topic with profound scientific, religious, educational, and criticism. How can a student or parent come to grips with this issue? Evolution vs. Creationism provides a badly needed, comprehensive, and balanced introduction to the many facets of the current debates about what should be taught in a classroom or in reality itself. Evolution relies on scientific facts while creationism clings on biblical beliefs. But the legal and

In the “Monkey Trial” William Jennings Bryan spoke as the leader of the Christian fundamentalist, what him and his followers wanted to do was for the people and court to find out how unfair it was for something that they perceived as “materialistic and anti-religious be taught in the very same classrooms from which all religious instruction had been banned” (Thomas, 2009 p. 25). This situation created a lot of debates among the people. Many things changed in the American public schools that arise because of the evolution theory and religion.

Thesis: It is patently absurd to argue that creationism and / or intelligent design deserve a place in public school textbooks in the "science" chapter or in any way near to the chapter on evolution. The United States Constitution guarantees freedom of religion and freedom of expression, so all faiths and denominations have the absolute right to worship and believe as they

In the late nineteen-eighties, Edwards v. Aguillard argued that a Louisiana law was against the First Amendment of the Constitution. This law prohibited public schools from teaching about evolution and the evolutionary processes unless the topic was taught alongside religious based creation theories. More specifically, this law imposed on public schools was argued to have broken the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. This clause simply says that absolutely no law can establish or support a religion (“Establishment Clause”, 2011). Many people challenged the state’s law including local parents and teachers as well as men and women with religious affiliations. Ultimately, the Supreme Court found that the state’s act was unlawful according to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment due to the fact that there was no non-religious basis to the act. The creation theories are entirely based around the idea that an all-powerful god created the human race. Therefore the state is promoting this religious teaching. Although it was argued that the act was to give students more opportunities to learn, the point was made that the teachers lost the power to make decisions in his or her own classroom. Furthermore, the law inhibits the learning of children by banning the teaching of evolution unless creation is also taught in the classroom. The law

“A delusion is something that people believe in, despite a total lack of evidence.” Richard Dawkins. Intelligent Design and Evolution have long been at odds, from laymen arguments to some of the prestigious minds in the world, all have been debating over this scientific rift. However, the question that has fraught even the most intellectual person; is Intelligent Design a religion or is it science? This issue has held the public school system back since the rising call for Intelligent Design to be in science textbooks. In the scientific field, there is a myriad of convincing evidence for Evolution and because of this many people believe that Intelligent Design is simply a religion. Since Intelligent Design is merely a religion and not a scientifically supported subject, adding it to

The objection to evolutionary theory and it's teaching began well over 100 years ago. Charles Darwin proposed in 1859 that populations of organisms underwent evolution through a process known as natural selection. Three years prior to the publication of this theory, in 1856, he wrote of "creationists" in a personal correspondence (Darwin, 1856). The notion that scientific theory conflicts with and rejects religious dogma has been a persistent, pervasive one. Religious organizations continue to push for the acceptance of creationism or intelligent design in school today. Despite the numerous legal cases brought to forth to force the teaching of creationism in public schools, we of the school board maintain that creationism has no place within our schools.

What is the difference between belief and ethics? Where is the line drawn between faith and law? This is the debate fought by creationists and those who recognize evolution as true. The argument has been thrown back and forth for years. But, the real question is, should intelligent design be taught in public schools? In America, creationists believe that the world was created by a god, the majority of which is made up of Christians, are usually the the people that believe in intelligent design. This Christian theory states that all life on earth, and the earth itself, was created by an intelligent designer or god in their present form. There are variations in belief including “Young Earth Theory,”

The controversy over Creationism and Evolution is a widely debated topic, especially when it comes to what is being taught in the biology classrooms in public schools today. It may be hard to imagine, but just over 100 years ago the curriculum and beliefs would have looked dramatically different. One central court case that created a spark of bringing evolution to public schools was the infamous Scopes trial of 1925 in which science teacher John Scopes challenged Tennessee state law and taught evolution in his high school science class. Tennessee state legislature had passed a bill, known as the Butler Act just months before, banning the teaching of evolution. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) represented Scopes after his arrest in a case that riveted public attention. Although at trial Scopes was ultimately found guilty, the Butler Act was no longer enforced and laws prohibiting evolution being taught in the classroom continually were defeated over the course of the next two years. In 1968, the ACLU went to the Supreme Court on behalf of Susan Epperson to fight against the ban on teaching evolution in Arkansas. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the ban as unconstitutional as the First Amendment under the Establishment clause does not allow teachings to tailor to certain religions (“State of Tennessee V. Scopes,” n.d.).

According to Reiss, there are many people who reject the theory of evolution and believe that the Earth was created as described in the Bible or the Qur’an. Intelligent design is linked to creationism, however, it can also call itself a theory that critiques evolutionary biology instead of siding with religion. Reiss says creationism along with intelligent design are on the rise unlike in the past where there was very little mention of these topics in the classroom. Schools in multiple countries are becoming battlegrounds over the issue of evolution vs creationism. A publication of the first volume of a seven-volume series of 800-page books critiquing evolution along with the rise of creationism has resulted in science education literature to take a closer look at creationism.

I am writing this topic because I would like to teach myself, what creationism really means, and if it violates any of our rights. Creationism brings the aspect of religion and beliefs into play, and it is a matter of perspective if it should be taught in public schools. There has been little consideration of this issue in private schools, as they are not subject to the public’s control and opinion. However, there are still measures that the private schools have to meet, such as standards to meet the proper accreditation. The main reason that creationism is the locus of controversy is because some Christian perceive creationism and evolution as conflicts to modern day society. These views remained constant over the last few decades, but they originally manifested different times ago. In the early times of public schools,

Hello, Savanna. Thank you for replying! I really do love this kind of discussion topic. Anyways, although we can't actually touch God I still be Intelligent Design is as scientific as Darwinian evolution. The beginnings of evolution can't be touched or proven either; however, both theories can claim scientific evidence. What I am trying to say is both theories require faith because no one was there to experience the beginning. I agree with you about how sad it is that a different theory can't be taught in public schools. Neither has been proven as fact, so both be presented and left to the students to decide what they believe.

In an article published in the New York times, by Laurie Goodstein, she revealed that a poll conducted by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, revealed that 64 percent said they were open to the idea of teaching creationism in addition to evolution, while 38 percent favored replacing evolution with creationism. It is important to note by this poll that the idea of teaching our children other theories of how this world was created was supported by more than half of the polled population. It needs to be understood that when these teachings are given the opportunity to be introduced in the public school settings, teachers must maintain a very bias approach as to not sway their students into believing one side or the other but, rather let them decide for themselves through research and study what they will believe in.

Creationism being taught in public schools is not right because there are many beliefs about how the earth was created. Many science teachers have different beliefs on this particular subject. Some believe it should not be taught in public schools but on one’s own time at home, church, or another place. Other science teachers think students should be taught all the believable theories about evolution and creationism. Some science teachers have gotten in trouble with the law by not obeying other laws regarding evolution and creationism. This has lead to a lot of controversy in the science world. Even though many students have different views on creationism, not all of them are very accurate in the ways they portray the teachings of

Constitutional tests can be applied to the above suggestions for teaching evolution, creationism, and intelligent design in public schools. For the Lemon test, it could pass for the secular purpose if done not to promote any particular religion but as an opportunity for students’ autonomy and it must be optional. Allowing it in the schools as an elective covering multiple viewpoints does not advance religion(s) by forcing it on anyone nor does it hinder religion(s) by keeping it from anyone. Keeping out of the science classroom can help to prevent excessive entanglement. Including the teaching of evolution, creationism, and intelligent design with the latter two as an elective could pass the Sherbert test because as an elective the course does not interfere with the practice of religion(s), the compelling interest could be met because keeping it separate avoids excessive entanglement and uses science time for science instead of debates that distract from class time, also avoiding a possible altercation or mob scene.

The Creationist are steadfast in their beliefs and refuse to yield. Yet Intelligent Design and Creationist are similar in that if you substitute “intelligent agent” for God then you have the same thing. The conflict in Dover in many ways was a means, some believe, for the Creationist to insert their beliefs in the classroom. The belief that the universe was created