WHAT SHOULD I BE DOING INSTEAD OF THIS?
 
August 10th, 2011 By | News | Posted In: School Board, Courts, Religion, Public Policy

ACLU Warns Springboro

13 Comments
     
Tags:

School officials in a suburb north of Cincinnati are being warned not to add creationism to their curriculum if they want to avoid a costly legal challenge.

The ACLU of Ohio recently sent a letter to the Springboro Community City School District stating that the teaching of creationism in public schools is both unconstitutional and unscientific. During the past several decades, the U.S. Supreme Court and other courts have consistently found that teaching creationism, intelligent design, or other religious-based ideologies unfairly promote one belief system over others, the letter added.

Some Springboro school board members have said they're interested in exploring ways to integrate creationism into the school’s curriculum. Supporters of the plan say it's permissible because it wouldn't be a required course, merely a supplemental course that could be taken as an elective.

That still doesn't pass legal muster, the ACLU said.

The ACLU has a long history of defending everyone’s right to practice the religion of their choice, or none at all,” said James Hardiman, the ACLU of Ohio's legal director, in a prepared statement. “However, if public schools begin to teach a religious ideology as scientific fact, it sends a message that the school supports that religion over others. Preferential treatment makes all people less free to hold their own beliefs.”

If the school district doesn't prevail in the court challenge, the ACLU added, it would be responsible for paying all legal costs in the case.

School officials could find much better uses for its resources than passing an unconstitutional policy that flies in the face of their mission to educate young people and perpetuates the myth that religion and science cannot coexist,” Hardiman said. “Evolutionary theory and religion need not be opposed to one another.”

In 1987, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the Edwards v. Aguillard case that teaching creationism in public schools violated the U.S. Constitution. In December 2005, a federal judge in Pennsylvania ruled that intelligent design, a new ideology promoted as a scientific alternative to evolution, was no different than creationism.

Additionally, scientists have nearly universally dismissed these theories as unverifiable, the ACLU noted.

Springboro is located 40 miles north of Cincinnati, and sits in portions of Warren and Montgomery counties.

 
 
08.10.2011 at 05:47 Reply
As an independent and an atheist it is my unbiased observation that the unscientific willful ignorance that the ACLU is guilty of is to automatically equates intelligent design to creationism, when in fact this is not necessarily true. What if the ID is a more advanced civilization that has learned to master the physics of the forces?... for example. So from a scientific standpoint only, it does not matter whether or not the creationist believes that it is god as long as there is some realistically plausible evidence in support of the idea that we are not here by accident. This question is debated, even though it may not even be debatable, as there are numerous reputable atheist physicists who will offer evidence for a "life principle", for example. The bottom line is that this issue is purely political, no matter how loudly that left winged ideologues scream that they are the ones doing science.

 

08.11.2011 at 02:24
CRW
Unfortunately, there is solid evidence that our best explanation for the way life exists today (not how it originated) is evolution. You are obviously are not a biologist or you would understand that arguments against ID go much further than whether or not it is a form of creationism. This is not a left vs. right issue. This is science vs. fantasy issue. Plug in the words, god, alien, whatever, and the evidence remains absent. Any hypothesis that implies a designer or designing force has never withstood scientific scrutiny. ID assumes irreducible complexity. There is no evidence of IC anywhere. Every claim of IC has been refuted with evidence.

 

08.11.2011 at 09:06
"Unfortunately, there is solid evidence that our best explanation for the way life exists today (not how it originated) is evolution." Another bogus assumption of left winged ideologues is that ID necessarily negates evolutionary theory, which it does not, and only YEC's claim this. Nice try, not really.

 

08.14.2011 at 12:11
"Another bogus assumption of left winged ideologues is that ID necessarily negates evolutionary theory..."

Actually the Discovery Institute, the leading ID "think" tank, and a group that can hardly be described as "left winged ideologues" claims that ID is correct and evolution wrong, so obviously they believe they're incompatible as well.

But yes, of course they're incompatible, unless the intelligent creator just assembled the original chemicals and then let everything alone to evolve as it would. If someone who believes that can find some evidence to back it up, they should do so, otherwise it's just a strange form of wishful thinking.

 

08.14.2011 at 03:25
"Actually the Discovery Institute, the leading ID "think" tank, and a group that can hardly be described as "left winged ideologues" claims that ID is correct and evolution wrong, so obviously they believe they're incompatible as well." Another bogus assumption of left winged ideologues is that everybody at the DI is a YEC, or that they don't believe in evolution from common ancestry, when in fact many or most **actually** claim that the evidence indicates that evolution isn't an unguided purposeless process that has no discernible purpose or goal.

 

09.04.2011 at 04:42


"There is no evidence of IC anywhere"................................ Yep, that's what liberal fanatics who deny, suppress, willfully ignore, and downplay the significance of evidence like to claim, all right, but that has nothing to do with science or the actual evidence and how it gets inteerpreted.  Keep drinking the Kool-Aid, lib.

 

09.04.2011 at 05:12

"island" replied to CRW: "Yep, that's what liberal fanatics who deny, suppress, willfully ignore, and downplay the significance of evidence like to claim, all right, but that has nothing to do with science or the actual evidence and how it gets inteerpreted.  Keep drinking the Kool-Aid, lib."........................................................................

This is where the lib typically comes in and asks, "What evidence?"... which would be fine except that they will then proceed to deny, suppress, willfully ignore, and downplay the significance of any evidence that gets presented, even if it is the authoritative opinion of experts in one or more of the relevant fields of study.

This only serves to betray the fanatic's true motivation which is their religion, known begrudgingly to physicists as, "Copernicanism", which is the unsupported belief that our existence is ultimately meaningless, irrespective of any evidence that may run contrary to their ideologically affected belief system.  They are no different than fundamentalists, and this is the reason why ID needs to get pushed, not because it's any more correct than the "neo" darwininan interpretations.

 

08.11.2011 at 06:11 Reply
There is no such thing as a scientific fact. The scientist that called Piltdown man a scientific fact, or those that believed that Newtonian physics had the full ability to explain gravity realized this, as well as those who once believed the universe was static was a scientific fact. Every few years, and sometimes decades or centuries, theses so called scientific facts turn out to be not so factual. "We do not imply that a legislature could never require that scientific critiques of prevailing scientific theories be taught. . . . [T]eaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind to schoolchildren might be validly done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction." (Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578, 593-594 (1987).)

 

08.14.2011 at 12:02
Actually there is; a scientific fact is called an observation. An observation would be something like noticing that when something is unsupported it falls. Every time. That's an observation. Piltdown man was a deliberate fraud from a time when we had very few hominid fossils, so there was little to compare it with.
As time went on and more fossils were found, it was easy to see that Piltdown man simply didn't fit, and eventually it was examined thoroughly in the light of new knowledge and discovered to be a hoax. That's how science works – by learning. The same of true of Newtonian physics, except you are implying that they are wrong; they're not, they just don't apply when approaching the speed of light. Science learns, and the more it learns the more it *can* learn. It isn't a case of "Science thought this yesterday and thinks this today so science is stupid." It's a case of learning.

 

08.11.2011 at 08:42 Reply
There was an article written by “The Curmudgeon”, named “Ohio School Board Retreats from Creationism”. It is about the hypocrites on the Springboro School Board (a suburb of Dayton Ohio), that were trying to gain notoriety among the voters by pretending to want to give school students another viewpoint besides the theory of evolution. They weren’t serious, but I am. I wrote to them, and as just about all school boards do, they ignored me. I sent them the same letter as I did Texas (“An Open Letter to the Texas SBOE), who also failed to respond. But that didn’t inspire the writing of this letter. What else I read in “The Curmudgeon” did. As my recent flurry of written articles suggests, I seek out challenges in order to disseminate the truth of Genesis, namely the first chapter. I’ve challenged the Pope (who exposed his ignorance about Genesis), the NCSE, the Discovery Institute, and the “creationist clowns” of all young Earth - old Earth creationist organizations I could find. Current Creationism is a misrepresentation of what Moses wrote. The correct opposing view to evolution is the “Observations of Moses”, which explains the 4 billion year history of Earth. In the Springboro article it said “Representatives of the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio and the national Freedom From Religion Foundation have written Springboro school leaders, noting legal action would be imminent if the district decided to teach some form of creationism.” Oh really? So the ACLU is the “big bad wolf” that intimidates school boards, keeping many from giving their students a balanced education? This is another chapter of the article named “Termination Notice: The End of Evolution”. I’ve been waiting to lock horns with the ACLU, ever since the cowards of the Cobb County school board needlessly capitulated to your whims, allowing the evolution theory to escape to live another day. This was in 2003 – 2004 in Atlanta GA. Yes, they ignored my letters, and their impotent law firm ignored my phone calls, thinking that they could win without my assistance. They thought wrong, as did the Dover Area School Board in York County PA. I told Dover that Intelligent Design was inept, nearly worthless, and that they should teach the “Observations of Moses”. As I did with Cobb County, I offered to work with the defense team, but all parties ignored me. So the board lost the case, and their jobs. When will people start learning from the mistakes of others? What made things worse is that on the Cobb County appeal to the 11th Circuit Court, my “Genesis Brief” helped the Appeals Court to decide to return the case to the District for either further definition or a retrial. It was expected that Cobb County would win the second District trial. But the school board couldn’t justify ignoring me further, and decided to capitulate. Evolution could have fallen then, but the board allowed it the “live another day”. So, it comes to this. Evolution is a lie. It is a foolish, ridiculous theory, embraced by atheists (and infidels), that has a monopoly in public schools……, currently. I am determined to change that. Public schools presently only offer evolution, which means that they are teaching the tenets of Atheism, using public funds. But the kicker is that the ACLU is the “guard-dog”, preventing many from offering opposing views to evolution. I can’t challenge you directly, but if any public school board, that seriously wants to teach their students the truth about prehistoric history, I will gladly 1) instruct their science teachers on how to correctly convey what Genesis says about our origins and history, and 2) work with the defense team to defeat the ACLU if they participate in any lawsuit against the board for “de-monopolizing” the evolution theory. Reiterating, current creationism does not correctly convey what Moses saw and wrote in Genesis. Teaching from Genesis has nothing to do with “religion”. It conveys factual history which starts from Creation Week (168 hours), more than 4 billion years ago, down until the year 1958 BC. So, to all school boards across America, I’m the “lion”, waiting to devour the ”guard dog”, breaking all its teeth. Start taking steps to teach your students the truth about our prehistoric past, without fear. Herman Cummings ephraim7@aol.com

 

08.11.2011 at 11:43 Reply
Evolution: The Creation Myth of Our Culture [July 10, 2011] http://www.trueorigin.org/evomyth01.asp To be updated to 50 questions in a few months.... * From the August 15, 2005 edition of TIME magazine: Evolution Wars. http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1090909,00.html Richard Dawkins: "Creationists are fond of saying that there are very few fossils in the Precambrian, but why would there be? asks Dawkins. "However, if there was a single hippo or rabbit in the Precambrian, that would completely blow evolution out of the water. None have ever been found." * Palaeontologists still haven't found a hippo or rabbit fossil in the Precambrian, but they _have_ found pollen, spores, angiosperms, gymnosperms, and at least one winged insect. Eocambrian (Upper Precambrian): dated from about 1.6 billion to 600 million years ago So why hasn't Dawkins ever announced that _these_ discoveries completely blow evolution out of the water?

 

08.12.2011 at 12:26
Great! Who made these discoveries? When? And where?

 

08.14.2011 at 11:50
Apparently r2d3 realized that he couldn't back up his assertions with evidence. This is called willful ignorance. AKA lying.

 

 
 
Close
Close
Close