You are hereWhy It's Wrong to Teach Creationism in Public Schools
It's religious discrimination.Teaching creationism privileges a single religious viewpoint. Most mainstream Christians, Jews and Muslims, along with Hindus, Buddhists, deists, and those of other faiths, reject many or all of the doctrines held by self-styled creationists. Covering the entire spectrum of religious beliefs about origins might be appropriate for a comparative religion class, but it is not appropriate for science classes. Facing Challenges to Evolution Education
In 1983, The National Center for Science Education (NCSE) was founded to promote excellence in science education, improve public understanding of evolution, and defend evolution education from sectarian attacks. In 1987, when the Supreme Court struck down a Louisiana anti-evolution law, many observers thought the "creation science" controversy had been put to an end. Instead, it returned to the local level, where new strategies appeared in countless communities and at the state level, as well. Getting Started
Each controversy over the teaching of evolution is unique. However, these basic principles have proven to be valuable for opposing anti-evolutionism whether it occurs at a local school or in national discussions.
Basic Principles for Taking Action
Analysis of the "Santorum language"
In 2001, the United States Senate adopted a "Sense of the Senate" amendment proposed by Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pennsylvania) as part of an education bill. As reported here, the resolution included the phrase, "where biological evolution is taught, the curriculum should help students to understand why the subject generates so much continuing controversy..." There was little doubt that Santorum's language could be used to undercut the teaching of evolution. "Theory, Not Fact" Policies — What's Wrong?
(Download this document as a pdf file here! )
Senator Edward Kennedy on Intelligent Design
In a Washington Times editorial, March 14, 2002, Senator Santorum implied that Senator Edward Kennedy supported the teaching of intelligent design in public schools. Senator Kennedy responded in a letter to the editor on March 21. The Truth about the “Santorum Language” on Evolution
(from NCSE's analysis of the Santorum language)
Kenneth R. Miller, Professor of Biology, Brown UniversityThe "No Child Left Behind" Education Act does not call for the teaching of "Intelligent Design." Project Steve: the Press Release
Embargoed till February 16, 2003TEACH EVOLUTION!Over two hundred scientists named Steve agreeDenver, Colorado, February 16, 2003 -- A first-of-its-kind statement on evolution signed by over 200 scientists was unveiled today at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual convention in Denver, Colorado, following Lawrence Krauss's topical lecture entitled "Scientific Ignorance as a Way of Life: From Science Fiction in Washington to Intelligent Design in the Classroom." The statement -- sponsored by the NatioProject Steve FAQ
Project Steve: FAQsIs this for real?Yes. The signatories of the Project Steve statement are indeed 220 (and counting — 1204 as of April 13, 2012) scientists, whose degrees and institutions are as represented, who have indicated their agreement with and endorsement of the statement, and who have consented for their names to be used. Consult the Steve-o-meter for the current number and the latest Steve to join the list.Science vs. Intelligent Design: The Law
(from NCSE's analysis of the "Santorum" language, originally published in 2002) Pages
|
