Religious Tyranny

Hagia Sophia behind Bars of Blue Mosque Istanbul

Once again, a state is trying to pass an underhanded bit of legislation that would be used to inject religious views into a public school science classroom. At the end of January, the Indiana Senate approved a bill that would allow schools to teach "various theories of the origin of life." While the legislation still has to pass through committee and the Indiana House of Representatives, the fact that creationist legislation has once again been introduced at a state level is troubling, to say the least.

Since the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial in 2005, it was ruled that attempting to teach "intelligent design" was the equivalent of teaching creationism, a distinctly religious idea, and was not permissible in the science classrooms of public schools. Despite this clear Supreme Court ruling, multiple states and school districts have continued to attempt adding creation "science" to public school classrooms.

The text of Indiana's proposed legislation originally read as follows: "Sec. 18. The governing body of a school corporation may require the teaching of various theories concerning the origin of life, including creation science, within the school corporation."

Perhaps somewhat surprisingly, this bill did not even attempt to disguise teaching creationism as the less threatening intelligent design. And it is a certainty that any attempt to teach "creation science" in schools will be a distinctly Christian creation story, considering the current religious demographics of the United States.

It then becomes telling that the bill was amended to read somewhat differently after it passed through the Indiana Senate. The text of the current bill removes the use of the term "creation science" and adds on "the curriculum for the course must include theories from multiple religions, which may include, but is not limited to, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and Scientology." The change was introduced by Sen. Vi Simpson, D-Bloomington, in a move she hoped would bluntly point out the religious implications of the bill. The sponsor of the bill stated that he disliked the change to the bill but hoped that it would increase support.

Thankfully, after a good deal of opposition from the scientific community, the House speaker noted that this issue was something that had previously been ruled upon by the U.S. Supreme Court, and this amendment may be a "side issue and someplace we don't need to go." It is questionable whether the bill will progress further, but the fact that it was introduced gives yet another look at the climate towards evolution in schools in America.

While it could be argued that the phrasing of the bill doesn't specify the curriculum be implemented in a science classroom, the original text of the bill that contained the phrase "creation science," implying an intended change to the science curriculum, and the topic of the origin of life is usually reserved for a life sciences or biology course.

Sen. Brandt Hershman, R-Wheatfield, considers the current wording of the bill to be "no different than any history of philosophy class we would offer in high school or a curriculum setting." If, perhaps, this bill was for the discussion of creation stories among various religions and taught in the context of a history, religion or philosophy course, there would be little issue. However, presenting any creation stories — regardless of which religion they stem from — as scientific ideas violates the fundamentals of scientific theories.

Evolution is taught as a valid theory and set of facts because it is such. In science, facts refer to things that are directly observable. Measurements, observations and data all constitute facts. Facts that support the theory of evolution include things like the extensive fossil record, DNA sequencing data and experiments or observations of the evolution of species in a lab or natural setting.

Additionally, a theory in science refers to "a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence." Well accepted theories include the theory of heliocentricity, the germ theory of disease, the theory of gravity and the theory of plate tectonics, to name a few. Evolution is the theory that explains all the facts we have collected with regards to the mutability of species. Theories must also be falsifiable and can be used to predict about the world.

Creation stories are not equivalent ideas to tested and refined scientific theories and, as such, should not be taught alongside evolution. They cannot be falsified, nor do they have predictive power. On a further note, the state legislature of Indiana should not be spending time arguing about whether to amend the curriculum to allow for the addition of religious ideas in a science classroom. There are surely better uses of the time and resources of the state legislature.

Opinion Policies

Opinions expressed in columns and letters are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Daily or organizations with which the author(s) are associated. 

Feedback policy: The Daily encourages discussion but does not guarantee its publication. We reserve the right to edit or reject any letter or online feedback. The goal of the opinion section is to spark civil public discourse by publishing opinions based on facts that articulate an argument. The merit of a piece's ability to further public discourse, among other factors, will be considered when determining if a piece is publication worthy. 

Letter to the Editor Submission Link

(1) comment

Herman Cummings

Religion is already in the classroom. It's the religion of Atheism.

The evolution theory is an irrational falsehood, zealously embraced by atheists, that is a phony conclusion of the 600+ million year fossil record. There is no “valid supporting data” for evolution. In a court of law, or in a public forum, the same evidence that evolutionists would use to try to “prove” the validity of that theory, I would utilize to reveal the truth of Genesis. In order to believe in evolution, you have to purposely ignore certain facts of reality. For example, when you see illustrations of primates being pictured as evolving into humans, it can be shown in a court of law that such a premise is impossible, because certain human and primate traits are different, and could not have ever been shared. The only “common ancestor” that humans and primates share is God Himself.

Current Creationism has refused to teach the truth of the Genesis text, and either teaches foolishness (young Earth), or false doctrines (non-literal reading of the text). Creationists thoughtlessly try to prove “Creationism”, rather than seeking and teaching the truth of Genesis. How can an untruth, ever prove another lie, to be in error? You can’t do it. That is why Creationism fails. It essentially is also a lie, and should be discarded, even by Bible believers.

The correct opposing view to evolution is the "Observations of Moses", which conveys the truth of Genesis chapter one.

Those that imply that God used evolution are infidels at worse, or clowns at best, that refuse to learn the truth of Genesis. The truth has been available for more than 18 years. Such a discussion is currently silly, and shows stubbornness against learning the truth of God's Word.

There are no "creation stories" in Genesis. In fact, about all of theology and creationism have no idea what Moses was writing about. You can't simply take an advanced book of math or science, and try to read from it on your own without personal instruction.

For example, Genesis declares that mankind has been on this Earth, in his present likeness, for more than 60 million years. The "male and female" in Genesis chapter one was not "Adam & Eve". Has modern science discovered that yet?

Herman Cummings
ephraim7@aol.com

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.