Teaching Creationism Vs Intelligent Design

The two-hour special documentary, Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial, features the Kitzmiller v. Dover School District case in 2004. It captures the turmoil that tore apart the community of Dover, Pennsylvania in one of the latest battles over teaching evolution in public schools. Some members of the community believed that not only Darwinism, but also a so called theory, Intelligent Design, should be taught in their public high school. It was a battle between the two theories. It forced neighbor against neighbor and friend against friend. The community itself was broken half and half on the controversial issue.

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

The riddle of the origin of man has been subject to many ponderings and theories for thousands of years. In America, two theories concerning this timeless question have driven a spike through the general populace. These two beliefs, Evolution and Christianity, have driven a riff through the American populace and fueled several debates and conflicts over which is the truer theory. Incidents such as the decision of the Kansas school board to ban schools from including the Evolution Theory from their curriculum are becoming a tragically frequent and threaten to escalate if not checked soon. However, there is a growing belief in America today in the possibility of believing that evolution is an inescapable fact while still

In 1925, the Butler Act was passed, which prohibited the teaching of evolution in public schools. The teaching of evolution was seen as a destructive force that would destroy civilization, and a threat to the word of God (Document 3a). An American teacher, John Scopes, was sent to trial for teaching evolution in his biology class. During the trial, Dudley Field Malone, an attorney at the time, argued that the courts were not debating whether Scopes taught a couple of pages of evolution to his class. Rather, they were debating whether or not society should be based on religion or science (Document 4). This produced a shift from ancient beliefs to modern ideas because the popular trial was able to finally bring science to life in

Facts: The parties in this case are the appellant, Susan Epperson an Arkansas public high school teacher, and the State of Arkansas. Ms. Epperson brought legal action against the State of Arkansas in order to challenge the Constitutional legitimacy of the State’s “Anti-evolution” law. The “Anti-evolution” law made it illegal for any teacher in a state supported school to teach evolution or to use a book, which included the theory. Ms. Epperson believed the State’s prohibition of teaching evolution violated her Constitutional rights and thus initiated legal action in the courts.

On January 20, 1925, a Tennessee state senator named John A. Shelton proposed a bill to make it a felony, or a criminal act, to teach evolution in the state’s public schools. Fundamentalists had been supporting and pushing the passage of laws such as this, because the teaching of evolution and Darwinism contradicts the religious beliefs of creation in Christianity. Popular evangelist, Billy Sunday, undertook an eighteen-day crusade in Memphis in support of the prospective bill. Night after night, Sunday’s audiences grew until more than two-hundred thousand people heard him preach against the evils of evolution. The bill, known as the Butler Act, was officially passed on March 21, 1925, just 3 months after its proposal. Just as state legislators suspected, the ink had hardly dried on the Butler Act before its first challenger emerged.

Louisiana legislators established the Louisiana Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science in Public School Instruction Act. The Act forbids the teaching of the theory of evolution and the theory of “creation science” in public elementary and secondary schools unless accompanied by the instruction of the theory other. The Act defines the theories as the scientific evidence for creation or evolution and inferences from those scientific evidence. The lower courts established that the Act violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because it lacked a clear secular purpose.

On January 20, 1925, a Tennessee state senator named John A. Shelton proposed a bill to make the teaching of evolution in the state’s public schools a felony, or a criminal act. Fundamentalists had been supporting and pushing the passage of laws such as this for years, because the teaching of evolution and Darwinism contradicts the religious beliefs of creation in Christianity. Popular evangelist, Billy Sunday, undertook an eighteen-day crusade in Memphis in support of the prospective bill. Night after night, Sunday’s audiences grew until more than two-hundred thousand people heard him preach against the evils of evolution. The bill, known as the Butler Act, was officially passed on March 21, 1925, just 3 months after its proposal. Just as state legislators suspected, the ink had hardly dried on the Butler Act before its first challenger emerged.

The Scopes trial, writes Edward Larson, to most Americans embodies “the timeless debate over science and religion.” (265) Written by historians, judges, and playwrights, the history of the Scopes trial has caused Americans to perceive “the relationship between science and religion in . . . simple terms: either Darwin or the Bible was true.” (265) The road to the trial began when Tennessee passed the Butler Act in 1925 banning the teaching of evolution in secondary schools. It was only a matter of time before a young biology teacher, John T. Scopes, prompted by the ACLU tested the law. Spectators and newspapermen came from allover to witness

In the United States, the theory of evolution and creationism has been strictly debated as far as which method if any should be taught in science classes across the globe. How was the earth created? Where did humans come from? These are questions that arise in most science classes. Many students require an explanation to why humans exist. There are those who would oppose evolution, and there are those who oppose creationism. Is there a significant difference between these methods? Several states have passed regulations that allow schools to teach both methods. The Louisiana Science Education Act, in particular, is an extremely controversial debate. The act allows teachers to teach adscititious materials in the classroom. Many opponents are looking to repeal this law. The Louisiana Science Education Act should not be repealed as it allows the student to engage in critical thinking skills, acknowledge both theories and ultimately decide which theory they believe in.

Aguillard case, attitudes towards science education have not changed in any significant way. Don Aguillard, the plaintiff of the Edwards case, did research on attitudes in the decade following the court’s decision on his case. He gathered data from Louisiana high school teachers in the 1997-1998 educational school year. He found that, “Fifty-two percent of biology teachers [indicated] that creationism was scientifically valid…14 percent of biology teachers indicated that creationism was not scientifically valid.” (Aguillard 1999, pg. 185)

With advancements in intellect and social boundaries changing, political inconsistencies swept the nation creating widespread conflict concerning specific beliefs based in religion. The most exemplary and remembered scenario in which politics and religious beliefs wove together was a court case regarding the teaching of evolution as opposed to creation. Because religion, specifically Christianity, remained the prominent faith in America, the teaching of evolution became shocking and simply disgraceful. This court case, the Scopes trial, displays an instance in which the debate of legality in teaching evolution in a public school turned into an attack on a man’s faith as Clarence Darrow pestered W.J. Bryan about his religious beliefs and practices.

One final example of Easton's definition of politics is school districts. Each public school belongs to a school district, which are governed by an elected or appointed school boards. Each school district is unique with their own policies and financing. Policies reflect the values of the school districts citizens. One example is where evolution, intelligent design, or both should be taught in school; also what grade it should be first taught in. Some school broads feel evolution should not be taught and others feel the intelligent design is teaching religion and not science. Parents are advised to see where their school board stands on the issue. Parents are also told to look at their child's science textbook and see how it is taught and where

Teaching Creationism or Intelligent Design to our youth can be done in a way that is neither opinion based nor completely fact based, but may hold some risk of personal interpretation. The first thing needed to be considered is how can children of the middle school age range grasp such a deep subject and have the capacity to reach their own conclusion. Information found regarding the development of children in this developmental range was found in the book titled "Characteristics of Middle Grade Students,” Caught in the Middle by the Sacramento Department of Education. It was found that students of this age hold a variety of learning attributes that support the belief that children can handle both sides of this controversial issue. Some

Public schools are a place to learn proven facts and some very well—known and accepted theories. These schools have been led this way for a long time and show no signs of changing. Many states around the country have rejected the teaching of creationism in public schools, since the subject is so controversial among teachers and parents. In Ohio, a bill to develop new science content standards was not successfully passed. Many creationists were upset when they discovered that the first drafts of the standards were filled with evolutionary content, without any allowance for alternative explanations of life’s origins. In the uproar, the state board held a special meeting to investigate the process that the writing team and advisory committee used to draft the science standards (Matthews, Answering Genesis). This is why learning the facts about evolution should be taught at school. By doing this, there would be much less confrontation between teachers, students, and parents. If one has the desire to learn about creationism or any other beliefs of how the world came to be, one should learn it at a place outside of school, such as church or at home.