The Atheist Mama

Today, on DI’s index page, there is a link to an article about the overwhelming support in Ohio for Intelligent Design.

On that page, there are two links: one pointing to the “executive summary” (which is password protected) and another link pointing to the “complete report” (they provide a broken link, but please see the complete report here).

Discovery Institute commissioned Zogby International to conduct a phone survey for a period of 1 day (2/2/06 thru 2/3/06).

Robert Crowther, director of communications for Discovery Institute, said:
>“The public is solidly behind the approach to teaching evolution that the Ohio state board of education has already adopted. Those attacking the school board for supporting teaching both the evidence for and against evolution don’t represent the views of the majority of Ohioans.â€�

From the complete report:

>Which of the following two statements come closest to your own opinion?
>A) Biology teachers should teach only Darwin’s theory of evolution and the scientific evidence that supports it.

>B) Biology teachers should teach Darwin’s theory of evolution, but also the scientific evidence against it.

>C) Neither/Not Sure

>In 2006 in Ohio:

>A = 19%
>B = 68.8%
>C = 12%

>Do you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree with the following statement: “When Darwin’s theory of evolution is taught in school, students should also be able to learn about scientific evidence that points to an intelligent design of life.â€�

>1. Strongly agree 2. Somewhat agree 3. Somewhat disagree
>4. Strongly disagree 5. Not sure

>In 2006 in Ohio:

>1. Strongly agree 56.4%

>2. Somewhat agree 19.3% Agree 75.7%

>3. Somewhat disagree 5.0%

>4. Strongly disagree 13.0% Disagree 18%

>5. Not sure 5.9%

Notice that in each question they are claiming that there is scientific evidence for ID? I would support ID if there were scientific evidence pointing to it too. The problem? There is no scientific evidence.

By: Center for Science & Culture
Discovery Institute
February 14, 2006

Action Needed: Darwinist Censors Mount Effort to Repeal Ohio’s “Critical Analysis of Evolution” Model Lesson Plan

>In 2004 the Ohio State Board of Education led the nation by adopting a landmark model lesson plan on the “Critical Analysis of Evolution.” However, those who favor a Darwin-only approach to teaching evolution are now trying to strong-arm the Board into repealing this lesson plan. In January, the Board voted 9-8 to preserve the lesson plan, but the razor-thin margin of the vote guarantees that Darwinists will try to get the Board to repeal the lesson once again at the Feb. 14 meeting.

Oh how I wish I could attend tomorrow… How innapropriate would it be to bring my children? ;-)

In the Columbus Dispatch, Catherine Candisky give her report of the happenings yesterday.
She quotes Rothschild:
>Why is there this need for critical analysis of evolution? Why is there no call for critical analysis of plate tectonics?

Read the article here.

She does say that the issue is expected to come up tomorrow at the meeting.

Tomorrow the Ohio BoE will be meeting at the Ohio School for the Deaf. Here’s what’s on the schedule. ID is not on the agenda but I read somewhere (can’t recall where right now) that they would more than likely be discussing the topic some.

I won’t be able to make it. I did try to get a sitter but it didn’t work out. Maybe next month.

I was able to make it to this event after all!!
See the flyer.

As I said in my last post, this was held at Tifereth Israel in downtown Columbus, and it was a really nice place. Yamikas were provided at the door for the men.

This event was sponsored by Ohio Citizens for Science and the National Council for Jewish Women. I learned that “NCJW believes that religious liberty and the separation of religion and state are constitutional principles that must be protected and preserved in order to maintain a democratic society.”

Kicking things off was Dr. Hillel J. Chiel of Case Western Reserve University. He was speaking on Religion vs Evolution: An Unnecessary Struggle for Survival. He talked about how evolution is the conceptual framework for biology. He covered a little bit about Evolutionary Algorithms, which I will quickly admit is way over my head. He spoke about how science is responsible for the “how” questions and religion is responsible for the “why.”

Dr. Chiel talked about the common thought that evolution leaves no room for God. Of course, his thoughts were that evolution does leave room for God and that it absolutely does not lead to atheism. He discussed the idea that evolution implies “Social Darwinism.” He suggested that yes, there are those that have the ideas that Social Darwinism would be a good thing, but no, evolution does not imply Social Darwinism, nor does it endorse it.

He talked about the question, “Why not teach ID?” His answer for that was “because ID does not provide material explanation for natural phenomena and it does not generate testable hypotheses.”
He then covered the “why not teach the controversy” question. He brought up a good analogy: There are those who deny that the Holocaust occured. Should there be a critical analysis lesson plan designed on that topic? Should that controversy be taught to our children? I would think not…

Dr. Chiel said that America values and encourages creativity, tolerance, skepticism, ingenuity and the rights of individuals to think independantly.

He then took a few questions and the first question asked was, “Doesn’t teaching only evolution promote atheism?” I heard a gasp, but I think it was me. He looked at her and said, “No…” in a tone that said, “have you been listening to me at all?” He again told her no, it does not lead to atheism and then a man from Ohio Citizens for Science took the mike and told her that thinking that evolution leads to atheism would be the same as plumbing leading to atheism. He said that it wouldn’t matter to him what religion his plumber was, as long as he could work with the pipes. Religion shouldn’t be a factor in this. This is about science.

So then they got set up for Eric Rothschild. Unfortunately, he couldn’t make it because he got stuck in the snow, as did Tammy Kitzmiller. Luckily, they had his presentation there and we had him on speaker phone!!

He completely explained how the lawsuit came about. I’m not going to get too into that, but it was very interesting hearing it first hand from Mr. Rothschild. Here’s a link to some really good info on the case if you’re interested.

He talked about the book Of Pandas and People brought to us by the Foundation for Thoughts and Ethics, and how it clearly went from a Creationism book back in 1986 to an Intelligent Design book in 1993. All they did was change a few words (creationism to intelligent design).

So that’s a good summary of what was discussed. He answered a few questions, one from a woman who began, “With all due respect, have you even read our lesson plan on the ‘Critical Analysis of Evolution?’” She also pointed out that it was not teaching ID, it was just suggesting that the students “critically analyze” the theory of evolution. The people in the room began to stir… He said that he had read it, and pretty much said that it was the same thing (I can’t quote him word for word here). I honestly thought for a second there that a debate was going to break out. She was armed with paperwork and tried to tell him he was mistaken. I wasn’t very close to the action, but I believe she was told that she had already asked her question and to take her seat - can’t be sure about this though because I couldn’t really hear what was being said.

After all of the other questions were asked, I learned that a few Ohio State Board of Education members were there to address the group. First was Sam Schloemer who represents Hamilton and Warren counties. He was appointed in 2002 but was elected in 2003 to a 4 year term. This is a good man. His bottom line was that this whole situation was an agenda by fundamentalists and that it needed to be stopped. He got a great applause.

The other board member that was present was Rob Hovis from Millersburg.
Unfortunately, that’s when I had to go. So if anyone knows what he had to say, I’d love to hear it!!

Sorry about all of the links. I was trying to be thorough and I hope they’re useful! I wish that the pictures had come a bit clearer, but that’s alright. I was mainly there to listen and learn. I consider the pictures a bonus.

Thanks for reading!

Today, while reading God is for Suckers, I came across this link posted in the comments of “No Xtian Agenda! […].”

The article that was linked to is titled “Their Own Version of a Big Bang” and Stephanie Simon of the Los Angeles Times talks about Answers in Genesis, the Creation Museum being built outside of Cincinnati, and the brainwashing of children and adults alike.

>”Boys and girls,” Ham said. If a teacher so much as mentions evolution, or the Big Bang, or an era when dinosaurs ruled the Earth, “you put your hand up and you say, ‘Excuse me, were you there?’ Can you remember that?”

>The children roared their assent.

>”Sometimes people will answer, ‘No, but you weren’t there either,’ ” Ham told them. “Then you say, ‘No, I wasn’t, but I know someone who was, and I have his book about the history of the world.’ ” He waved his Bible in the air.

>”Who’s the only one who’s always been there?” Ham asked.

>”God!” the boys and girls shouted.

>”Who’s the only one who knows everything?”

>”God!”

>”So who should you always trust, God or the scientists?”

>The children answered with a thundering: “God!”

The above dialog is from an AiG weekend conference in Wayne, NJ that started on Jan 20, 2006.

Scary, huh? These children are the future of the United States.

The man who founded AiG is the one responsible for building the $25 million dollar, 30,000 sf Creation Museum that will be located right outside of the Cincinnati Airport.
This museum will teach it’s visitors:

>• The Earth is about 6,000 years old, not millions as many say.

>• God created everything in six days.

>• Adam and Eve and all other creatures were vegetarians — until the first couple sinned. Meat-eating and death then followed.

>• Dinosaurs must have lived at the same time as humans. Because death came only after Adam and Eve sinned, the dinosaurs couldn’t have lived and died before them.

>• A great flood destroyed much of the Earth and killed the dinosaurs, but Noah and the animals in the ark were spared.

>• God chose the Israelites to bring his word to the world.

>• Jesus died and was resurrected to end human separation from God caused by sin.

How do you even talk to someone who would believe and allow their children to believe such lies? How do you not offend them when you are talking to them?? How do you sit quietly by when so many are trying to insert their beliefs into the mind of your children? I don’t think it’s possible.

**Edited to add: I just learned that Pharyngula wrote a piece on this too. Check it out.

>Hell, there are no rules here - we’re trying to accomplish something.

Thomas Alva Edison was born in Milan, Ohio on February 11th, 1847. In his lifetime, Edison patented 1,093 inventions, and earned the nickname “The Wizard of Menlo Park.” The most famous of his inventions was an incandescent light bulb.

Here’s a list of a couple of links about Edison.

As was done on October 21, 1931 as a tribute to this great man dim or turn off your lights for a minute in his memory.

Happy Edison Day as well, Columbus!!

I used to belong to a group called “The Island.” It’s a private (very private - don’t even try to get in - they’ve created their own universe that excludes newcomers that aren’t invited by a member) group on the internet made up of about 130 women (mostly moms of young children). There is a long story behind how it became what it is but I’ve known some of these women for about 3 years. While we all have different beliefs - be it religious, political, parenting - we all got along really well. There are some very good women there. I even met a lot of them in person.

I left the group around March of 2005 because of some disagreements. Recently I decided to join again. I thought that I had a lot of friends there that I wanted to keep in touch with. I didn’t want several years to go by and not know what was going on with them and their children.

What I didn’t think about was how much I had changed in the last year. While I’ve been an atheist for a few years now, I was not as outspoken about my thoughts until the last 6 months or so. Well, “The Island” is probably about 95% Christian. Before, I didn’t mind. I kept my thoughts to myself and ignored all of the religion and church talk for the most part.

Apparently I can’t ignore it anymore.

The mistake I made was going to the debate board. Was I looking for trouble? I don’t know… I didn’t think that I was.
But what else could have possible happened when religion was the topic up for debate??

The subject of “Religion, Politics, Science, and Education” came up. Someone had posted their thoughts about all of these subjects and what has been going on in the world recently. For the most part, I agree with everything that this post said (except for the fact that science and religion can co-exist because it’s becoming obvious that it can’t). I posted about how I thought that the country was being run into the ground and that religion was basically the reason for it. I said that religion was human kind’s worst enemy and that it warps people and their comprehension of life. I then decided that I was going to stay out of these types of debates and I told them that. I said that I didn’t want to offend people that I considered friends. Truely I didn’t. I then suggested “The End of Faith” by Sam Harris.

Then came this post. This post is completely intact. This is also a huge no-no for “The Island” because “what happens on the island stays on the island” and posting things like this in “public” is grounds for removal. LOL! I actually used to be on the Admin team.

Anyway, I’m no longer a member. I deleted my membership after this took place. So here’s the post:

>I’m not going to discuss the whole topic… b/c to be honest its huge… But I do want to address this.. although to hear the media tell it, you’d think Christian fundamentalists are trying to take over the public schools, I don’t think that is actually reality. I am an active member in a huge conservative Christian community and OVERWHELMINGLY… my perception is that most conservative christian families have given up on the public schools. I certainly have and amongst my friends and aquaitances IRL at my church (which is huge Southern Baptist mega-church) and amongst the two Christian on-line communities to which I also belong that seems to be the concensus. The only possible scenario that I can fathom that will ever include [child] going to public school is if [husband] is dead or incapcitated and therefore I must become the primary breadwinner, and even then I’d try to keep him in private school if I could manage it. If it is possible for the three of us to survive on a single income (no matter the sacrifice) I would homeschool even though its not my first choice. I never participate in the science education debate b/c to be honest I no longer care what they teach in the public schools. And the reason I wouldn’t send him to the public school is *NOT* b/c of the lack of Christian doctrine or b/c of the evolution/creation debate. Its because of the secular humanist world view that *is* religion and is already being taught in the schools. Its primary doctrine is the idea that everything is acceptable except saying that something is *not* acceptable, unless that something is Christianity. Its main precept is that above all else you should live your life so as to not offend anyone. Its ethics are situational.. and there is no absolute truth. It glorifies human accomplishment and universal tolerance above all other things. These lessons are taught and retaught everyday and in every class, no matter the subject. That’s what I reject and its what I think most conservative christian parents are rejecting by the thousands as they remove their kids from public schools all across america. It might seem that the vocal few who remain are trying to take over by the whole creationism debate and other issues, but I feel they are fighting a losing battle. I think conservative christian parents are turning instead to high quality academic programs that teach a biblical world view. And I’ll be totally honest, the result that I can see in the youth of my church is young people better educated than those in the public schools who are not going to sit down and be quiet.. who know how to stand up for their beliefs and don’t care what the rest of the world thinks about it. They will grow into adults who won’t take the route their parents did and that, I think, should worry the anti-religion folks a lot more than incompetent teachers uttering the word God in a science class where no one learns anything anyway.

Whoa!!! How in the hell do I stay out of the debate now?? But I should have because I got so worked up that I didn’t speak clearly and did a lot of damage. I said a lot of things that were pretty offensive to these women after reading this. I was so blown away. I should have just shut up.

Anyway, the debate rolled on from there and I was accused of being the one spreading hate and intolerance (as opposed to religion, and more specifically, Christianity).

I’m still pretty worked up about this. I do feel bad though… I should have known better than to discuss religion with “friends” who don’t have the same views that I do. I knew that going in. I question why I went back at all… Did I really want to surround myself with Christian women who are constantly talking about P&PT and the power of prayer and all that type of stuff… I had my husband read the above post and he warned me to stay away.

George Deutsch, the presidential appointee, resigned from NASA after being caught in a lie. A few days ago I wrote about Deutsch and his censoring of information coming from NASA. It was said that Deutsch was a 2003 journalism graduate of Texas A&M University. After some investigation, Nick Anthis of The Scientific Activist discovered that he never actually graduated!

Nick Anthis writes:
>The idea that NASA let a 24-year-old journalism major, with no experience in science or technology, other than writing a few articles about video games, determine what scientists were able to communicate to the public was pretty bad. The fact that he was censoring scientific information on global warming and the big bang made things more interesting, especially since he was a political appointee doing this to prevent challenges to the Bush administration’s policies. But now, finding out that he did not even graduate from Texas A&M, and may not have graduated from college at all, is absolutely outrageous.

Read more at The Scientific Activist (an excellent blog by the way).

Thanks to the Bad Astronomy Blog for the tip!

Tags:
NASA, Bush, Science, religion, politics

I’m in awe…

From the New York Times:
>In October 2005, Mr. Deutsch [presidential appointee] sent an e-mail message to Flint Wild, a NASA contractor working on a set of Web presentations about Einstein for middle-school students. The message said the word “theory” needed to be added after every mention of the Big Bang.

>The Big Bang is “not proven fact; it is opinion,” Mr. Deutsch wrote, adding, “It is not NASA’s place, nor should it be to make a declaration such as this about the existence of the universe that discounts intelligent design by a creator.”

>It continued: “This is more than a science issue, it is a religious issue. And I would hate to think that young people would only be getting one-half of this debate from NASA. That would mean we had failed to properly educate the very people who rely on us for factual information the most.”

Read all about this at the Bad Astronomy Blog, Pharyngula, Stranger Fruit, and The Reality Based Community. These guys certainly say it way better than I ever could!! All of these links have some great information and comments on the subject.

**Edited to add that the list of links above are just the ones that I read. The Bad Astronomy Blog has a whole list of blogs that are discussing this issue.

Take the quiz.

I only scored a 13. Apparently I have work to do.

Thanks to God is for Suckers for the tip!

Yesterday, while lounging around with my sick boys, I finished up Article II - The Executive Branch. Section 1 was pretty rough, but the rest wasn’t so bad. I’m glad that I did it yesterday. It made me understand the State of the Union and why that happens even more than before.

The rest should be pretty easy. I’m planning on finishing up the Constitution in the next couple of days or sooner.

District 6 (Franklin County), this is your representative.

[Link]

• Elected board member Michael Cochran of Blacklick “cross-examined” a string of witnesses, including a graduate student, who criticized the 10 thgrade biology plan.

• Elected board member Deborah Owens Fink of Richfield questioned the character of a witness by producing an e-mail he wrote to a colleague that ridicules a supporter of intelligent design.

• One person declined to testify, citing attacks on previous witnesses.

• Cochran and appointed board member Richard E. Baker of Hollansburg showed their apparent lack of interest by reading a newspaper during the testimony.

This is absolutely disgusting. Michael Cochran is the man that *we* elected to represent us and our children? He is making decisions about our children and their education?

I URGE you to write this man and express your disgust!

Read the article here or visit the link above to The Dispatch.

Tags:
intelligent design, evolution, Science, Creationism, atheism, atheist, Christian, darwinism, columbusblogger, ohio, education
(more…)

Find your elected member of the State Board of Education.

How did they vote on the issue of Intelligent Design on January 12, 2006?

Yes (Remove the Lesson)
Martha Wise (elected)
Sam Schloemer (elected)
Lou Ann Harrold (elected) NEW
Rob Hovis (appointed)
Note: Mr. Hovis was defeated by Ohio voters in the 2004 election (by a significant margin) for district 5, but was immediately reappointed to the board by Gov. Taft. Thus, he only represents Governor Taft, not Ohio constituents. He has become a primary spokesperson for the supporters of evolution.
Stephen Millett (appointed)
Eric Okerson (appointed) NEW
Jane Sonenshein (elected) NEW
Jennifer Stewart (elected)

No (Keep Intelligent Design in Science Classrooms)
Richard Baker (appointed)
Michael Cochran (elected)
Jim Craig (elected)
Colleen Grady (elected) NEW
Deborah Owens Fink (elected)
Emerson Ross (appointed)
Jennifer Sheets (appointed)
Sue Westendorf (appointed)
Carl Wick (appointed)

Absent
Virgil Brown (elected)
John Griffin (elected)
Note: On January 12, 2006 the Columbus Dispatch quoted Mr. Brown as saying that he stands ready to “withdraw or amend the lesson plan.” He also stated, “My feeling all along was that intelligent design is not a scientific theory and does not belong in a science classroom or science lesson.”
Board member John Griffin has been absent for many months due to his recovery from a stroke.

Contact your Board Member today and either thank them for their vote in favor of removing the lesson, or express your concern for their vote if they voted to keep ID in schools.

Thanks to Jill at Writes Like She Talks for her post on contacting Virgil Brown (one of the members absent from this meeting).

Thanks to Ohio Roundtable for the information on votes.

Tags:
intelligent design, evolution, Science, Creationism, atheism, atheist, Christian, darwinism, columbusblogger, ohio, education

The Bible and its Influence by the Bible Literacy Project is the book that juniors and seniors who elect to take this class (named for the book) will be given. The book is said to cover the Bible’s impact on art, literature and popular culture. The Bible and its Influence was written by 43 authors. It took five years and $2 million to produce. It sells for $67.95 retail and $50 for school orders.

On January 16th, the School Board in New Braunfels Independent School District voted 6-1 in favor of this adding this class to their offered courses paying $58,000 for the new course. They will more than likely have to hire a new teacher who is qualified to teach both Social Studies and English.

It is claimed that this course will be taught from a secular point of view, and that it will also cover other religions. I wonder how much truth there is to that. As a student brought up at the board meeting, can a teacher really stay objective on this subject?

Interestingly enough, if you go to MySA.com (San Antonio News) and look under the Education section of the News, you’ll find an article on the subject if you scroll down a bit. However, look in the Religion section of the News, and what will you find front and center? One has to wonder… Is this a victory for Education or the Church? Hmmmm….

I honestly find myself on the fence on this subject. I don’t think I have a problem with it being offered as an elective, as long as it’s limited to junior and seniors. But then again, what will be suffering because of the cost of the class? I also can’t help but see this as just another way to sneak Christianity into schools. A little creationism here, a little Bible there… They’ll have our kids brainwashed yet!!

It will be interesting to see where this leads. Alabama is pushing for Bible Study in their schools as well. In late 2005 House Bill 58 was introduced, “authorizing local boards of education to offer in public high schools Grades 9 to 12, inclusive, a course entitled “The Bible and Its Influence”; and to specify the course textbook.”

Thanks to Pharyngula for the tip!

Tags:
Bible, Christianity, Politics, Religion, books, Education, atheism, atheist

My Letter to the Editor was published in the Sunday Edition of The Columbus Dispatch!

[Link]

Sunday, January 15, 2006

I am disappointed in the State Board of Education and its decision to keep the “critical analysis of evolution” lesson plan (or the promotion of intelligent design) in our science classrooms.

How can we expect our 10 th-grade students (typically 15 or 16 years old) to make a separation between critical analysis of evolution and intelligent design, and between intelligent design and creationism? How can students be expected to critically analyze the theory of evolution without God being discussed?

Bringing ID into our science classrooms puts teachers on that slippery slope of God being brought into the classroom. It increases the likelihood that students, classrooms and high schools will be divided – where will it end?

The bottom line is that intelligent design is not science. ID involves a “maker.” Science is about nature, not the supernatural.

As a mother, I worry about our children and the quality of education here in Ohio. Time in science class is best spent on academics, not mythology. The money that will be spent in court as a result of this decision would be better spent on keeping schools in Columbus open.

CASSANDRA COX

Gahanna

Tags:
atheism, atheist, Christian, intelligent design, Creationism, evolution, darwinism, columbusblogger, ohio

Finished it. Finally. It’s amazing… The number of commas, the amount of capitalized words, the wording of some of these sentences. Wow.

Well, my brain is FRIED for the evening. Guinness #2 isn’t helping, but it tastes damn good.

I met my goal for the night. Wooo Hooo!!

To the Editor:

I am disappointed in the Ohio State Board of Education and their decision to keep Critical Analysis of Evolution (or the promotion of Intelligent Design) in our science classrooms. How can we expect our 10th grade students (on average, 14 years old) to make a separation between Critical Analysis of Evolution and Intelligent Design, and between Intelligent Design and Creationism? How can students be expected to critically analyze the Theory of Evolution without God being discussed?
Bringing ID into our science classrooms puts teachers on that slippery slope of God being brought into the classroom, it increases the likely hood of the division of students, classrooms, high schools… Where will it end? The bottom line is that Intelligent Design is not science. ID involves a “maker.” Science is about nature, not the supernatural.
As a mother, I worry about our children and the quality of education here in Ohio. Time in science class is best spent on ACADEMICS, not mythology. The money that will be spent in court as a result of this decision would be better spent on keeping schools in Columbus open.

Cassandra Cox

I have a feeling they’re going to toss this letter right out, but hey, I tried (and not all that hard, I might add). I’m sure that someone will write something similar that will be published for sure.

I found this site while researching the laws regarding teaching ID in Ohio - www.idnetohio.com

So for the last few days I’ve been going over the site and writing up my submission to the Dissenter’s Corner.

http://ohio.intelligentdesignnetwork.us/pages/dissenters-post-dec.-8.php

From the emails, I can say that the director is a really nice guy, is very respectful and seems very open to the opinions of others. I’m thrilled that I was able to get my opinion out there.

December 8, 2005 — Submission from Cassandra Cox in Gahanna

Intelligent Design Network of Ohio,

I’m glad to see that you are accepting and publishing opposing views; I respect and appreciate that.

I am a mother of two in Columbus, Ohio and I’d like to share my thoughts on this subject. I didn’t read all of the submissions completely, so I apologize if I am being redundant.

My overall opinion is that teaching “intelligent design” in public schools’ science classrooms is irresponsible and dangerous. While some think that ID is a scientific theory, the fact is that it is not. I see the push for ID in the science room as a part of a bigger political agenda.

Upon reading through your site, I want to respond to some of the comments made in your “Criticisms of ID Answered” section.

Criticism No. 3: Intelligent design is religious belief masquerading as a secular idea (http://ohio.intelligentdesignnetwork.us/pages/criticism-3.php)

In response to Response #1 - Perhaps Richard Dawkins did say that “Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.” I honestly doubt that he’d appreciate being quoted to back theists up in their claim that ID is not creationism in disguise.

In response to Response #2 - I noticed that atheism is described as a religion several times. Atheism is not a religion. Atheism is not a belief. So to say that Darwinism is “a religious belief masquerading as a secular idea.” about atheism is incorrect. Atheism is inherently secular.

“Nearly every dictionary will define religion as ‘belief’ in a divine or superhuman power or powers to be obeyed and worshiped as the creator(s) and ruler(s) of the universe. The definition of all other terms linked to religion employ much the same language - church, monastery, priest. They are all part of a religious-language universe or ‘game’ that has little to do with Atheism. There cannot be an Atheist ‘Church’, or an Atheist ‘priest’ anymore than there could be an Atheist ‘God.’” ~American Atheists (http://www.atheists.org/faqs/atheism.html#not.religion)

Criticism No. 4: Intelligent design is no different than belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster (http://ohio.intelligentdesignnetwork.us/pages/criticism-4.php)
In your response to Frank Wylie regarding the Flying Spaghetti Monster, you say that “if the Church of the Spaghetti Monster has any evidence to support its claims, then, in the interest of objective science IDnet Ohio will be in full support of their evidence-based science.” I don’t remember seeing any evidence here to support the claim of ID. If in fact you do have evidence to support your claims, please place a link directly to it in your navigation. It would make it much easier for people trying to understand how ID is a scientific theory.

Criticism No. 6: Most scientists do not support the position of intelligent design (http://ohio.intelligentdesignnetwork.us/pages/criticism-6.php)

I think that the response to this criticism scares me the most.

“You cannot expect ‘educated people’ to know anything on a topic for which they received no education, much less exposure.”

You can also not expect high school science teachers to teach on a subject that they have received no education, much less exposure to.

“The solution is to fix science education.”

Do you expect all science educators to be re-educated on the subject of ID? At whose expense? Who will be paying for the new textbooks that will have to include ID? Me? The tax paying atheist?

“…and teachers should encourage students to ask the right questions.”

Here are a couple of questions -

Who determines what the “right questions” are?

How can the subject of God not come up while discussing ID?

Is the teacher to guide the discussion away from specific topics?

How can a teacher answer all questions fairly and accurately without influencing her answers with her own beliefs?

What happens when the inevitable debate comes up: Evolution vs. Creationism?

No matter what you call it, ID and creationism go hand in hand. How can you expect high school students to make a separation between the two?

I think that the science classroom will become nothing more than a debate session that will include religion and more specifically, Christianity. I don’t see how it can be avoided.

“Most scientists do not support the position of intelligent design” (a claim that you agreed is 100% true).

If ID is not supported by scientists, who will be doing the research and how?

It seems that a lot of the answers to the criticisms are not answers at all. For example, instead of an answer to the criticism saying that ID isn’t science because it is not testable, the statement that is made is that “…the ‘untestability’ criticism of intelligent design needs to be turned back around on Darwinism.”

I visited the FAQ’s at discover.org (a link that you provided), and I’d like to comment on a few things I read there. First, after reading the claim that ID is not the same as creationism, I can honestly say that I see how that was once the case.

“Creationism is focused on defending a literal reading of the Genesis account, usually including the creation of the earth by the Biblical God a few thousand years ago. Unlike creationism, the scientific theory of intelligent design is agnostic regarding the source of design and has no commitment to defending Genesis, the Bible or any other sacred text.”

I can accept this. However, like I stated above, I don’t feel that this has much to do with actually teaching ID anymore. I think that this has “evolvedâ€Â? into a political, religious agenda at our children’s expense.

I also wanted to comment on number one under Questions about Criticism of Darwinian Evolution. It states that “The scientific theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause…”

In your response to Criticism No 1, you simplified the definition of science: “science is simply the human activity of seeking explanations for natural phenomena, the explanations being based on observable data.â€�

How can something that is “best explained by an intelligent causeâ€� be natural? It sounds to me like something that is supernatural.

su·per·nat·u·ral adj. (http://www.answers.com)

1.Of or relating to existence outside the natural world.

2.Attributed to a power that seems to violate or go beyond natural forces.

3.Of or relating to a deity.

4.Of or relating to the immediate exercise of divine power; miraculous.

5.Of or relating to the miraculous.

It’s truly amazing to me that this is even an issue in 2005. I feel as if we are going backwards. I don’t understand how anyone can support teaching myths in the science classroom. I think that teaching ID is just the beginning to possibly dividing classrooms, schools, communities… The country? Why not leave ID/creationism to the church and let schools focus on what is really important - academics.

Thank you,

Cassandra Cox

Gahanna, Ohio

Tags:
atheism, atheist, Christian, intelligent design, Creationism, evolution, darwinism, columbusblogger, ohio

Keep Science, Faith Separate

In the Atheist Mom’s group that I’m in, a member posted a response to an email written to Sue Gamble.
Here is an excerpt:

“This has stopped being about science or education it is now about stopping a political movement that wants to turn our education system back to a time that we did not expect that all students could learn to high expectations. If we don’t stop this movement now it will harm our economic viability both at the state level but also nationally because this is a national movement.”

How scary this statement is…

vjack is right. How in the hell is this happening in 2005?

Today I commented that I should re-visit the idea of “homeschooling for religious reasons” (and homeschooling is something I have wanted to do for a long time). After my son was determined special needs, I figured that the idea of homeschooling was no longer an option. But, luckily - what makes my son special needs has nothing to do with intelligence. I’m realizing that it is an option.

But then someone suggested:
“If you don’t like what’s being taught in the schools, that’s a really
*good* reason to stay involved with them, and demand that they adhere to
the Constitution.”

And how right she is.
I think that raising children in a society where they are teaching about creationism in science class is going to be a challange… How can we - such a minority - save our children?

I’m honestly saddened and hurt by all of this and I fear for us all.

Tags:
atheism, atheist, evolution, Intelligent Design