Arlene,

You suggest there is a concerted effort by pro-evolution groups to discredit intelligent design theory by linking it to creationism. In fact, such linking doesn't take any effort at all. The website you mention is run by the Discovery Instutute and Center for Science and Culture - well-known as Christian conservative think-tanks:

http://tinyurl.com/d4tvch

Personally, I think the Discovery Institute and Center for Science and Culture are trying to confuse people into thinking that intelligent design is some sort of "universal" concept. It's not. I'd like to see a list of members and/or sponsors for these entities who are not Judeo-Christians. I suspect such a list would be very small indeed - if one could be compiled at all.

Intelligent design, therefore, is championed by a narrow group of people who are "certain" they know the designer's identity. And if that isn't creationism, I don't know what is.

Intelligent design and creationism are two different things. There are atheists who believe in Intelligent Design. The following quote is from IntelligentDesign.org.

"Is intelligent design the same as creationism? No. The theory of intelligent design is simply an effort to empirically detect whether the 'apparent design' in nature acknowledged by virtually all biologists is genuine design (the product of an intelligent cause) or is simply the product of an undirected process such as natural selection acting on random variations. Creationism typically starts with a religious text and tries to see how the findings of science can be reconciled to it. Intelligent design starts with the empirical evidence of nature and seeks to ascertain what inferences can be drawn from that evidence. Unlike creationism, the scientific theory of intelligent design does not claim that modern biology can identify whether the intelligent cause detected through science is supernatural.

Honest critics of intelligent design acknowledge the difference between intelligent design and creationism. University of Wisconsin historian of science Ronald Numbers is critical of intelligent design, yet according to the Associated Press, he 'agrees the creationist label is inaccurate when it comes to the ID [intelligent design] movement.' Why, then, do some Darwinists keep trying to conflate intelligent design with creationism? According to Dr. Numbers, it is because they think such claims are 'the easiest way to discredit intelligent design.' In other words, the charge that intelligent design is 'creationism' is a rhetorical strategy on the part of Darwinists who wish to delegitimize design theory without actually addressing the merits of its case."

Creationism as currrently defined in public discourse belongs in the church and synagogue, and also, where appropriate, in literature and history courses. It is, however and in the main, a faith view and has very little to do with modern science instruction.

It's a real buzz kill when you wake up one day and realize that all the fairy tales you were taught about religion are just that, fairy tales. It made me angry that I had wasted all that time and money. Realizing my life had been hijacked by a false believe that there existed a deity became my liberation to think for myself. Oh well, at least I saw the light, and I came to accept science as the savior of mankind and civilization. There is hope for saving those enslaved by their religion but I truly feel sorry for the billions of people living their life based on lies.

I wonder what Larry Lancaster means by "Judeo-Christian philosophy."

Ahh furthur
I bet you were seething as you commented Huh? How dare he belittle me, LOL. That's to bad, seems to me that you are the type of person who has to have the last word. You need the help too. Too much anti"religion", i wasn't going to sit back and take it. Therefore i excersised my right to free speech. I am not projecting myself in the eyes of the community as simplelogic stated. The Bible teaches that, "Do not preach in the corner and boast of your deeds" rather i am trying to humble myself and simply stated my belief. Only God will see what i have done. And i have seen the light and peace of Jesus Christ.
Oh yea, you were in my prayer time this morning and i will continue to pray for all.
See you in the next article that comes up. Have a good and blessed day. Love it baby.

AHA!! Why not exclude Evolution from Biology, and offer it as it's own course, but not make it required curriculum. That way, people can choose to take it, and then it isn't "forced" on them. Then parents don't have to complain about children learning evolution, and they can keep creationism, which is religion, out of the classroom and keep it in church. Science in School and Religion in Church, the way it should be.

Not to look at both is not very scientific,

Everyone here should watch Penn & Teller: BS! It's a great show, and they great episodes on the Bible and Creationism. I don't agree with everything they say, but the show is hilarious and they provide some decent research for the topics. Even if you don't want to watch the episodes on Religion, out of fear that you will be offended, you can still watch others that cover the war on drugs, new age medicine, ghost hunting, and even hair. Great show, just trying to spread the love :D

BTW, not a show for children, that's why it airs on Showtime! :P

The results of scientific research are not determined by a public opinion poll. We do have to thank these people for openly admitting that their opinion is based on their religious beliefs. We already know this. The fact is that creationist belief is not based on scientific research. The scientific theory of evolution is the accumulation of several decades of relevant research in science, from biology to paleontology. Creationism is religion, not science. Notice that it is a pastor who proclaims "more scientists than not are coming to the conclusion that the universe is too well put together to be an accident". Of course, he's wrong, and is simply demonstrating the penchant of creationists for making bold proclamations based on nothing more than their own ignorance of the facts.

Most people who claim to be religious aren't religious as a means of spirituality. In fact, most of them actually want to PROJECT that image in order to further themselves in the eyes of the community, whether it's to polish their images or gain an edge in business. Business people believe that they will appear far more honest and believable as they make their profits. As for the few that ARE genuine in their efforts to push religion on underdeveloped minds, this should be accomplished by the capable hands of the churches of their choice. Not in a public classroom. I'm not sure that it's a great idea to allow a (twinky-eating, 3-times divorced, xanax-addicted) public school teacher to force-feed school children the theory that a human being was created from the rib bone of another human being.

Religion is not perfect as some of you have stated. Everyone should know that, take a look at the crusades of the past and of today such as the Islamic exteremist, Hinduism, etc.
Only God and his son Jesus are perfect. Yes i am a Christian, non-denomination and yes i am a sinner, but "my religion" is the belief in our Creator, that Jesus died on the cross for us, the Bible and an everlasting life. Heaven and Hell. Pick it up one of these days and read it. You do not have to believe the "stories" as some of you say .

to furthur why did you write P.B.you are my hero for so elonquently stating something so glaring obvious for those blinded by the "light" to consider and then turn around and say that you pray that i do not ask Him to hold the wheel??? Why are you praying if you do not believe? I hope when people are in need of comfort that you don't blow smoke by saying "i will pray for you, or i will keep you in my prayer, blah blah, i am a hypocrit, blah blah". And no, i would not look in my purse, as i am not a female. But if you were in need i would help.

iCitizen are you also Zorro, he/she stated the same thing.

Waywardwind Thanks, but i will continue to believe the facts are in the book of Genesis and ultimately our end in the book of Revaletion.

iCitizen..."History is replete with science being wrong and misguided on so many issues. If science were a political party it would have been disgraced and renounced for all its errors."

Do you mean something like the Catholic Church and Galileo? Jeeze, it only took from the 17th century when Galileo published his findings until 1992 when Pope John Paul II finally agreed that Galileo wasn't a heretic and the church was ... GASP! ... wrong. Do you mean something like that?

History is replete with science being wrong and misguided on so many issues. If science were a political party it would have been disgraced and renounced for all its errors.

Okay, Raven8, that's your life choice and your profound belief based on your christian faith, but that doesn't answer the question of where does creationism fit in the public education curriculum.

My thoughts are to teach that some people believe the biblical story of creation because that's what their religion teaches them. While no one actually KNOWS how the universe was made, here are the scientific facts as we know them........and go from there with physics, astronomy and biology.

I for one will boldly proclaim Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior. He is the king of kings and I pray that one day you too will see a revalation.
Say what you will, i rather be right then wrong.
On bended knee, you will give an account of your life.
To other christians who ignore these comments that were posted, shame on you.

History is replete with religion being wrong and misguided on so many issues. If religion were a political party it would have been disgraced and renounced for all its errors. When you accept things on faith, no amount of reason or scientific proof will dissuade you from your errors.

Having been involved in many vigorous debates on this issue, I am at a loss as to the source of all of this emotion. MAybe I just don't get it. What is the big deal? I have heard the tired old line "if we don't know where we came from, we can't know where we're going". Sorry, it just doesn't fit in this case. That line is reserved for life spans and social trends. Honestly, what difference does it make what the actual origin of man is? Does it have a direct effect on how you view yourself or live your life?

While I watch our freedoms disappearing at light speeed around me, pardon me if I don't devote a whole lot of my time to pondering the origins of my species. There are nation-wide, well-funded organizations, on both sides, that are devoted to push these agendas. I just don't get it. If you are a good parent, there is nothing that can be taught to your child in an 8 hour school day that you can't erase with one comment in opposition.

Another aspect of this issue that puzzles me is the 180 that some people have done in their thinking. Many of the people that want creationism taught in public schools are very distrustful of the public school system. How can you be so hypocritical? You don't trust the schools...yet you want these same schools to teach something you hold so sacred? What do you think will happen when the schools begin to teach it? Have you ever heard of spin? Propaganda? Do you think you will have any control at that point?

At least as it stands now, you have complete control over the creationism dialogue. You can decide which church to attend, and the schools are not entered into the equation. Why would you want to create competition? Schools have rewards to give for buying their propaganda...what is your church offering?

I think some in this debate need to do some serious pondering before they continue to push this issue. Like you have heard a thousand times before, "be careful what you wish for, you may just get it."

Teach what you want, it ain't like the kids are listening.

I'm back, I'm sure no one missed me :P

Creationism has no place in public education. Note, i said PUBLIC. This is because creationism, no matter what you call it or how you twist it, is religion. Also note, that last statement was made by a Christian.

One thing I love about this argument is how 95% of people for creationism in schools, all give the reason, "Teach it and let the kids decide." This will never be the case. How many parents told their children in Sunday School, "This is just a theory, you decide whether you believe it or not." It has never happened. It never will happen. As parents, we (I'm not one but hopefully will be in the future) want our children to learn from us, and we want them to have a good moral upbringing. We will never let ANYONE interfere with that, and that is what evolution seems to do for a lot of Christians.

Robert said, "if you open the door for one religion in school, then all will want to have their say" This is very true. For everyone who believes that the USA was founded on Christian beliefs, it may be true, but that's not what drives the country today. The great thing about our wonderful country now is diversity. We have many people from many cultures and religions who send their children to public schools. Creationism is a Christian argument.

On the other side, I understand how a lot of people can consider evolution to be the same thing. It can be considered a religion, but I feel there is a lot more science involved in evolution than in Intelligent Design. I know that as a Christian, I can really can't believe that God didn't have total control over the development of Earth. However, I do choose to believe in Evolution. I feel that the evidence is there, and the science has been done to prove it, but I do believe that God was involved. Maybe He did have control, but chose to let things play out.

Either way, save religion for church and home, and save science for school and home. My children will learn in school, but be raised at home.

Now you all can enjoy another few months without me :P

This is a debate that may never have a solution. There will always be people who don't believe in a supreme being or force. And, there will always be people who, by virtue of generations worth of indoctrination (aka brainwashing) that starts in early childhood (before people are allowed to attain independent rational thought processes), will choose to believe in cosmic poobahs sitting on golden thrones "up there" - constantly at battle with hobgoblins "down there."

Personally, I think childhood indoctrination into ANY belief scenario that doesn't pass muster using the scientific method of "proof" is a form of child abuse. And well-intentioned abuse is still abuse.

if you open the door for one religion in school, then all will want to have their say

let's leave religion out of PUBLIC schools and teach it at the house. time for parents to be parents and not try to push this off on schools.

i think we should teach it in the classroom. Lets teach all of the basis for all the religions that way the kids will finally understand that its all a bunch of story telling to scare people to be good and we can move on as a society. Havent enough people died in the last 12k years in the name of a so called god?

Creationism - including intelligent design creationism - definitely does not belong in any kind of science class. It belongs in religion classes - or possibly in psychology classes, where the study of the scientifically illiterate, the willfully ignorant and the hopefully gullible properly belong.

I'm looking at a science text book from Apologia and it has a whole section on evolution and it explains micro-evolution and macro-evolution.

Looks more like science than myths and stories to me. It's explaining BOTH views - actually there seems to be many variations and not just two.

Just pointing this out not to argue but to inform you that macro-evolution isn't about biblical myths.

In fact, there's no mention of bible stories in these texts.

And one more thing that I find interesting: This "creation science" program is one that Christian homeschoolers use to help them CLEP out of college science courses. So, even if a text is "creation" based it's still just like a secular text book when it gets down to it.

Just sharing that so you all don't go around thinking that "creationism" is just teaching about bible stories or that a "creation" science text isn't like a regular science text.

The table of contents is the same!

Yeah, let's teach them how something came from nothing:
1. "It is now becoming clear that everything can -- and probably did -- come from nothing." Robert A. J. Matthews, physicist, Ashton University, England
2. "Space and time both started at the Big Bang and therefore there was nothing before it." Cornell University "Ask an Astronomer."
3. "Some physicists believe our universe was created by colliding with another, but Kaku [a theoretical physicist at City University of New York] says it also may have sprung from nothing . . . " Scienceline.org
4. "Even if we don't have a precise idea of exactly what took place at the beginning, we can at least see that the origin of the universe from nothing need not be unlawful or unnatural or unscientific." Paul Davies, physicist, Arizona State University
5. "Assuming the universe came from nothing, it is empty to begin with . . . Only by the constant action of an agent outside the universe, such as God, could a state of nothingness be maintained. The fact that we have something is just what we would expect if there is no God." Victor J. Stenger, atheist, Prof. Physics, University of Hawaii. Author of, God: The Failed Hypothesis. How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist
6. "Few people are aware of the fact that many modern physicists claim that things --perhaps even the entire universe -- can indeed arise from nothing via natural processes. Creation ex nihilo -- Without God (1997), Atheist, Mark I. Vuletic
7. "To understand these facts we have to turn to science. Where did they all come from, and how did they get so darned outrageous? Well, it all started with nothing." --"Fifty Outrageous Animal Facts," Animal Planet
8. To the average person it might seem obvious that nothing can happen in nothing. But to a quantum physicist, nothing is, in fact, something." Discover Magazine "Physics & Math/Cosmology"
9. "It is rather fantastic to realize that the laws of physics can describe how everything was created in a random quantum fluctuation out of nothing, and how over the course of 15 billion years, matter could organize in such complex ways that we have human beings sitting here, talking, doing things intentionally." (Alan Harvey Guth theoretical physicist and cosmologist). Discover Magazine, April 1, 2002

I am a christian, and very against creationism being taught in science class. This is how my southern baptist university taught: in science classes, evolution was the only thing taught. If you wanted to learn about creationism, you took a class on religion. In middle school and high school, we learned about creationism (and other views of how the world came into being) when we studied world religions in social studies. You teach science in science class, and religion in a religious or historical setting.

Per the U.S. Constitution's 1st Amendment, U.S. public schools must be neutral with regard to religion. That being the case, and recognizing that there are a wide variety of religions represented in the student body, exactly which version of "creationism" should be taught in our public school SCIENCE classrooms?

Perhaps the Norse creation story where "Odin, Vili, and Ve put Ymir's corpse into the middle of ginnungagap and created the earth and sky from it. They also created the stars, sun, and moon from sparks coming out of Muspelheim."

Or how about the Comanche creation story where the "Great Spirit collected swirls of dust from the four directions in order to create the Comanche people. These people formed from the earth had the strength of mighty storms. Unfortunately, a shape-shifting demon was also created and began to torment the people. The Great Spirit cast the demon into a bottomless pit. To seek revenge the demon took refuge in the fangs and stingers of poisonous creatures and continues to harm people every chance it gets."

Or maybe the Hindu story in which "He, desiring to produce beings of many kinds from his own body, first with a thought created the waters, and placed his seed in them. That seed became a golden egg, in brilliancy equal to the sun; in that egg he himself was born as Brahma, the progenitor of the whole world. The Divine One resided in that egg during a whole year, then he himself by his thought divided it into two halves; and out of those two halves he formed heaven and earth, between them the middle sphere, the eight points of the horizon, and the eternal abode of the waters."

Well it doesn't get any more scientific than that, right? Gotta "make room for all points of view", right? Fourth graders will comprehend that, right? It's our Brahman-given.... I mean Great Spirit-given.... I mean Allah-given... er Jehovah-given... uhhh.... Oh yeah - God-given right!