They're back!!
Dimensions
. JOYCE S. ANDERSON Special to the Jewish Times

The opponents of teaching evolution in the science classrooms of the public schools have reappeared with the same old message cloaked in new phrasing. They no longer call themselves "creationists." Nor do they describe their cause as "intelligent design." Like the seven-headed Hydra from mythology, cutting off one head does not deter them from growing a new one with a new name. In its latest reincarnation, the words that identify the anti-evolution cause are "strengths and weaknesses."

During the past decades, both creationism and intelligent design failed in the courts. In 2005, after a controversial fight in Dover, Pennsylvania, that split pro- and anti- evolution members of the community, a federal judge in Pennsylvania banned intelligent design from the public school curriculum. The strategy favored by anti-evolution groups has been to elect their advocates to local and state boards of education. Since the boards control the curricula in the schools and the textbooks that are used, they have pursued this course with single-minded determination and skill. In Kansas, Texas, Pennsylvania and other states, the school board membership has seesawed back and forth with conflicting directives affecting the schools and their science curricula.

The long saga actually dates back to the sensational Scopes Monkey trial in July l925, when John Scopes, a high school biology teacher, was arrested and tried for breaking the Tennessee state law banning the teaching of evolution in the schools. The entire nation heard the trial over the radio and the newspapers followed every detail of the case as it unfolded. The defendant was found guilty, but the judge fined him a minimal amount of $100 under political pressure from the governor of the state. The classic movie, "Inherit The Wind" gives a vivid portrayal of the events and passions surrounding the trial. When one listens to the advocates today who oppose teaching evolution in the science curricula, one hears the same arguments and passions that rocked Dayton, Tennessee - and the nation - during those hot July days.

In Texas, this summer, the State Education Board will determine the science curricula for the next decade and the textbooks that will be used in the classrooms. There are l5 members on the board; seven members endorse intelligent design, including the chairman, Dr. Don Mc Leroy, a dentist, who has stated categorically that he does not believe in evolution. "I just don't think it's true or it's ever happened." In the l980s, the "strengths and weaknesses" language was inserted into the curriculum standards in Texas to appease creationists when the State Board of Education first required the teaching of evolution. As the anti-evolution proponents were able to elect more board members, the phrase was resurrected to launch the latest stage of the on-going battle against Charles Darwin.

The Discovery Institute, based in Seattle, is the organizational headquarters of the intelligent design movement. The basic premise of intelligent design is the theory that life is too complex to have developed through evolution. Therefore there must be a higher power behind creation. The Institute has petitioned legislators in Florida, Alabama, Michigan, Louisiana, Missouri and South Carolina to require that classrooms be open to "views about the scientific strengths and weaknesses of Darwinian theory." The Discovery Institute has given legislators a rationale to file "academic freedom bills" to provide an even handed evaluation of evolution as a "theory" rather than the accepted principle by all mainstream scientists. In both Florida and Louisiana, "academic freedom" bills were discussed in their most recent sessions with passage in the Louisiana House of Representatives.

Decisions about science curricula and textbooks in Texas will not be made by the state legislators. They will be hammered out in the State Board of Education. Dr. Mc Leroy believes in the biblical description of the formation of the earth as a recent geologic event - thousands of years rather than 4.5 billion years of evolution. He has said, "I believe a lot of incredible things. The most incredible thing I believe is the Christmas story. That little baby born in the manger was the god that created the universe." Yet, he added, "My personal religious beliefs are going to make no difference in how well our students are going to learn science."

Dr. Dan Foster, former chairman of the department of medicine at the University of Texas at Dallas, expressed his alarm at the latest foray of the anti-evolution advocates. "Serious students will not come to study in our universities if Texas is labeled scientifically backward." He continued, "I'm an orthodox Christian and I don't want to say that Christianity is crazy. But science not scripture belongs in the classroom." It should also be noted that what happens in Texas regarding the textbooks they choose has a direct effect on other states. Texas is one of the largest textbook buyers in the country, and publishers avoid producing different versions of textbooks from a business standpoint. If Texas demands that "strengths and weaknesses" of evolution be inserted into the science textbooks, the chances are that it will be the same textbook offered in other states.

Governor Rick Perry, a Republican, is in favor of the "strengths and weaknesses" approach to evolution being discussed in science textbooks for the public schools. He also has the support of President Bush who held a round table interview with reporters from five Texas newspapers three years ago. When the subject of teaching intelligent design in the science classrooms of the public schools came up, he said, "I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought. You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes." He added that "Both sides ought to be properly taught in the public schools." The inference was clear - that both sides were equal. John H. Marburger 3rd, the president's science advisor, tried to tamp down the controversy. He reaffirmed that "evolution is the cornerstone of modern biology" and "intelligent design is not a scientific concept."

Kathy Miller, director of the Texas Freedom Network, a group that promotes religious freedom, has criticized the current struggle in the State Board of Education. She said, " 'Strengths and weaknesses' are regular words that have now been drafted into the rhetorical arsenal of creationists." Dr, Mc Leroy denies that the phrase is "subterfuge for bringing in creationism." He pleads his case with, "Why in the world would anybody not want to include weaknesses?"

One could argue that Dr. Mc Leroy is asking the wrong question. The basic question is not about the literal interpretation of the Bible as to how long it took for human life to emerge on the earth. The question is whether it is the role of the science classrooms in the public schools - funded by taxpayer dollars - to debate views based on religious faith versus established scientific knowledge on Darwinian evolution.

Joyce S. Anderson is a freelance writer whose articles have appeared in the New York Times, the Philadelphia Inquirer and other national publications. She is the author of "Courage in High Heels," "Flaw in the Tapestry," "If Winter Comes" and "The Mermaids Singing." She can be reached at JSAWrite@aol.com.