12-22-05, 8:58 am

In a major victory for parents who want their children to learn science in science classes and religion doctrine in their homes, churches, mosques, or synagogues, a federal court ruled this past Tuesday that Dover, Pennsylvania schools could not teach the concept of 'intelligent design.'

US district Judge John Jones III ruled that the public school district board in Dover violated the Constitution by ordering science teachers to read a statement that implied that the religious-based myth known as intelligent design is a scientific alternative to the theory of evolution.

Jones, a Bush appointee, wrote in his decision that 'intelligent design' was clearly a religious viewpoint and is being pushed by groups who are trying to introduce the Biblical story of creationism into public schools as science. He noted specifically that it was a Christian-based concept and teaching it as science in a public school classroom violated the First Amendment prohibition on establishing religion. He further chastised the school board for trying to conceal their religious motivations, saying, 'We find that the secular purposes claimed by the board amount to pretext for the board's real purpose, which was to promote religion in the public school classroom.'

Jones described the religious right's maneuver to replace science with intelligent design myths as a 'tactic [that] is at best disingenuous and at worst a canard.'

Jones pointed out that the evidence brought before him overwhelmingly showed that intelligent design was simply nothing more than relabelling creationism 'and not a scientific theory.'

Eleven area parents sued the school board in 2004 after it ordered science teachers to tell their students that a 'controversy' existed among scientists over evolutionary theory and that intelligent design was a scientific alternative. What they could not say, however, is that this 'controversy' is an ideologically-driven one not based on scientific data and is being pushed entirely by proponents of intelligent design.

Popular opposition to teaching intelligent design as science prompted the voters in Dover to elect seven new school board members last November. According to local media, the new board considers the ruling to be a 'done deal.'

The overhaul of the school board by the voters prompted Christian fundamentalist demagogue and television personality Pat Robertson to express his hate for Doverites accusing them of rejecting God.

Supporters of the parents who filed the lawsuit to protect scientific education declared victory. Ralph Neas of the People for the American Way, said that the 'ruling is a momentous affirmation of the Constitution’s prohibition of government endorsement of religion.'

'The court recognized that ‘intelligent design’ is nothing more than religious creationism in disguise, and that, as such, it may not be taught as science in public schools. This decision is a resounding victory for science education, for public school students, and for the Constitution,' Neas added.

Neas also noted that the ruling does not prevent any student from learning about intelligent design or any other religious myths in the appropriate social studies course, such as world religions.

Ira Glasser, an advisory board member for the group Campaign to Defend the Constitution and former ACLU head, noted that the decision 'recognizes, along with the voters of Dover, that attempts to impose religious beliefs as an alternative ‘science’ cannot constitutionally be forced by law upon students and their families.'

Scientist Lawrence M. Krauss, also with the Campaign to Defend the Constitution, expressed concern that as US students continue to fall behind the rest of the world in their understanding of science, forcing them to learn non-scientific ideas in science classes will not help close this knowledge gap.

Krauss said, '[The decision] should send a message to school boards across America and to those who attempt to use them as pawns in an ideological public relations initiative that we cannot expect to close this gap if we substitute ideology for sound science in our science classrooms, and that we should put our efforts into turning kids on to science, not distorting it.' , the head of the civil liberties organization that helped the Dover parents with their lawsuit, echoed these comments. 'We hope today’s decision sends a strong message to proponents of creationism that it is inappropriate to attempt to advance a particular religious belief at the expense of our children's education,' Romero said.

'Teaching students about religion in world history or social studies is proper, but disguising a particular religious belief as science is not,' he concluded.

.



--Joel Wendland is managing editor of Political Affairs and can be reached at jwendland@politicalaffairs.net.