Skip to main content

Edwards v. Aguillard (Creation Science and Evolution)


A question came up in my social studies class about prehistory. A student wanted to know how all the different species came into existence. We talked briefly about the Cambrian explosion, which prompted another student to ask about the origin of the universe. This led to a great discussion about cosmology that has since spawned other discussions about God, time, and origins. It just happened that I had been reading The Case for a Creator, by Lee Strobel, so answers to their questions were fresh in my mind. It also brought me back to a civil liberties class I took in college, in which we were required to simulate landmark Supreme Court cases. In one of these, we simulated Edwards v. Aguillard (1987), a case that struck down a Louisiana law—called the “Balanced Treatment for Creation Science and Evolution Science in Public School Instruction Act”—forbidding the teaching of evolution in the public school classroom unless it was accompanied by the teaching of creation. The central question revolved around whether the law established a religion. I argued fervently that the law did not establish a religion because it did not fail a test established by the Supreme Court called the Lemon test (from the case Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971), which states the following:

1. The law must have a secular purpose;
2. The law’s effect must not advance or inhibit religion
3. The law must not cause an “excessive government entanglement” of religion.

I found great help in this from Antonin Scalia’s dissent in the case. Besides arguing that the Louisiana law did not fail the Lemon test, he also showed that secular humanism had previously been determined by the Supreme Court to be a religion (Torcaso v.Watkins, 1961), stating that by prohibiting the teaching of creation science (intelligent design) and promoting the teaching of evolution science, teachers were now in fact advancing a religion.

To this day, I believe strongly that both evolution and intelligent design should be taught together to offer students all the evidence so that they can come to their own conclusions. As Scalia pointed out, creationism and evolution are the only two viable explanations for man’s origins. It is only fair to provide students with evidence for both explanations.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Savior

This wasteland cold and dark runs free Its fearful creatures speak to me One fateful day one nudged my hand To set my eyes upon a tree He knew I could not understand For I was in his native land His signs became our common speech To lead me through the deadly sand Now stuck I saw him me beseech He could not lift me out to reach The firm foundation of a cave Outside the boundaries of this beach Withal, the beast became more brave To risk his own my life to save To carry me, its life it gave To carry me, its life it gave. This poem was inspired by Robert Frost's "Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening." That poem, like this one, has four four-line stanzas of eight syllables per stanza. Its rhyme scheme is AABA BBCB CCDC DDDD.
Post a Comment
Read more

Soul and Spirit

As a friend told me about a conversation she had with one of our pastors about whether animals go to heaven, she told me about the Hebrew word nephesh ("soul"). I wondered, then, what the difference was between soul and spirit. After a little research, I came across what many seem to agree is a main difference. The soul of a person is that person's being--personality and life--while the spirit is that part of us that connects with God. There are several verses that refer to spirit in this way:* "The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned." (1 Corinthians 2:14) "But I, brothers, could not address you as spiritual people, but as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ." (1 Corinthians 3:1) "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly p...
Post a Comment
Read more

Evil, According to Republicans and Democrats

Please note that the following thoughts are only my observations. Please consider the evidence you see in the behavior of both parties for yourself. In our politically polarized climate, I was thinking about how Democrats and Republicans are different, and where those differences come from. Democrats seem to place more hope in institutions, and seek to reform those institutions when there is something wrong in society. Hence, there is more willingness to levy taxes to offer more social services as a support to those with less than others. They see the state as a way to equalize society. Thus, evil, to Democrats, seems to be a social issue: if there is a problem in society--poverty, racism, climate change, etc.--it is a problem with the structure of society and must be addressed as such: repair the system, and you will solve the problem. They are generally accepting of a larger state bureaucracy because they believe that increased accountability within a state structure will prevent evi...
Post a Comment
Read more