Perspective: New form of creationism shouldn't be in school curriculum

The Scopes Monkey Trial is more than 75 years old but the effort to compromise the teaching of evolution in public schools seems ever-young. Today, creationism is back under a new, politically astute guise.

Creationists reject the idea embodied in evolutionary biology that man has a common ancestor with chimpanzees and gorillas. They say such a view diminishes the role God played in creation -- a belief they have every right to hold. But for them, it's not enough to merely hold a belief. They want public schools to preach their theology as fact.

According to the Washington, D.C.-based Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, in the 1920s there were 20 state legislatures considering prohibitions on the teaching of evolution. In the 1990s, nothing much had changed. Again, 20 states considered anti-evolution measures.

And now we have a political climate even friendlier to biblical literalism. Our born-again president and Religious Right attorney general welcome the entanglement of God and Caesar and are working to remake the judiciary in this image. President Bush is pushing for the diversion of tax money to faith-based social services and parochial schools, and he made clear, during the campaign, that he supports evolution and creationism being taught in the classroom.

At the same time, there is a new strain of creationism called "Intelligent Design" that is politically canny.

Intelligent Design theorists are not easily dismissed. They are credentialed academics who use the language of science and math in an attempt to unseat evolution as the abiding theory on how life began. While biologists say Intelligent Design "science" is just dressed-up religion and doesn't withstand peer review, these theorists can sound plausible. They admit the earth is hugely older than the thousands of years suggested in the Bible, but say natural selection cannot account for the diversity and complexity of life on the planet. There must have been an intelligent designer, a.k.a. God.

This tack is substantially more deft than the Adam-and-Eve creationists who challenge the legitimacy of the theory of evolution by whining that it's only a theory.

Eugenie Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Eduction, which defends the teaching of evolution, says that while Intelligent Design theorists put forth some provocative ideas, "they have not really come up with anything that has a lot of staying power in the scholarly community." She adds that Intelligent Design is much more a social and political movement than an academic one: "If they were solely a scholarly movement they would take their (scientific) critiques and go back and rework their ideas and submit them again." Intelligent Design theorists are not doing that, Scott says. Instead, they are lobbying hard to have their under-cooked ideas included in high school science curriculum.

For example, in the Michigan House, a bill has been introduced to alter the state's science standards for middle and high school. It states: "all references to "evolution' and "natural selection' shall be modified to indicate that these are unproven theories by adding the phrase "describe how life may be the result of the purposeful, intelligent design of a creator.' "

There goes the doctor pool from Michigan.

Of course there are many Americans who, as part of their faith, already believe that life was created through intelligent design. But without well-grounded scientific proof, the idea has no place in a public high school biology course.

What evangelical Christians and fundamentalists of other faiths should finally recognize is that science is not atheistic or anti-religious. It simply rejects supernatural explanations for natural phenomena. As one philosopher noted: Science is no more atheistic than plumbing.

Religion has nothing to fear from evolution. Long ago, mainstream Christians, including the pope, reconciled the natural sciences and their faith. What should trouble religious leaders is when government starts meddling in their business, adding spiritual ideas and beliefs to school curriculum in ways that may or may not comport with doctrine. If the nation's faith leaders think Bush's White House Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives is causing religious strife and dissention, just wait until the details of an Intelligent Design curriculum are under consideration.

They should all pray this never happens.

Back to Perspective

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page