The Scopes Trial was not the End of it

"The opera ain't over till the fat lady sings."

The Scopes Trial did not succeed in ending the battle to present religious belief in the public schools. But the language changed slightly. Perhaps “Darwinism” sounded too formal, or perhaps Darwin’s name did not reflect clearly the agenda of those who took up the battle and carried it into the 21^st Century. Whatever the reasons, the attempt to put science and religion on equal footing now is fought under the banner of “Intelligent Design.”

In Dover Pennsylvania in the spring of 2004, the Dover Area School District’s textbook review committee recommended a new text to replace the existing biology book. At a school board meeting in June, William Buckingham, the chair of the board's curriculum committee, complained that the proposed new book was "laced with Darwinism." After challenging the audience to trace its roots back to a monkey, he suggested that a more suitable textbook would include biblical theories of creation. 

When asked whether this might offend those of other faiths, Buckingham replied, "This country wasn't founded on Muslim beliefs or evolution. This country was founded on Christianity and our students should be taught as such."

 Defending his views a week later, Buckingham reportedly pleaded: "Two thousand years ago, someone died on a cross. Can't someone take a stand for him?" And he added: "Nowhere in the Constitution does it call for a separation of church and state."

To quote Mark Twain, “Faith is believing what you know ain't so.”

Buckingham's comment that the Constitution does not call for separation of church and state is a very loose idea of what our constitutional rights are. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.

I find it curious that people who insist that the Constitution guarantees their right to bear arms, though that right is actually in the Second Amendment, then argue that the First Amendment is not a Constitutional right!

When public school boards are populated by individuals who firmly believe that the United States is a Christian country, it is difficult for the public schools to maintain the separation between Church and State called for in the First Amendment to the Constitution.

The Dover school district decided to teach “Intelligent Design” as an alternative to Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, using a textbook titled Of Pandas and People. More than that, the decision was made to present, in the classroom, a disclaimer with regard to Darwinism. Before starting to teach evolution, biology teachers were enjoined to read the following statement to students in the ninth-grade biology class at Dover High School:

The Pennsylvania Academic Standards require students to learn about Darwin's theory of evolution and eventually to take a standardized test of which evolution is a part.

Because Darwin's Theory is a theory, it is still being tested as new evidence is discovered. The Theory is not a fact. Gaps in the Theory exist for which there is no evidence. A theory is defined as a well-tested explanation that unifies a broad range of observations.

Intelligent design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin's view. The reference book, Of Pandas and People is available for students to see if they would like to explore this view in an effort to gain an understanding of what intelligent design actually involves.

As is true with any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind. The school leaves the discussion of the origins of life to individual students and their families. As a standards-driven district, class instruction focuses upon preparing students to achieve proficiency on standards-based assessments.

The school board voted to require this statement. Three of the school board members in the minority of the vote resigned in protest, and science teachers in the district refused to read the statement to their ninth-grade students, citing the Pennsylvania code of education, which states that teachers cannot present information they believe to be false. Instead, the statement was read to students by a school administrator.

(Other states have included evolution disclaimers. In Clayton County, Georgia, the school board directed science teachers to paste into biology textbooks the following: This textbook may discuss evolution, a controversial theory some scientists present as a scientific explanation for the origin of living things,…No human was present when life first appeared on earth. Therefore, any statement about life’s origins should be considered as theory, not fact.)

Eleven parents of students in the school district sued the Dover Area School District over this statement. The plaintiffs were represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU) and Pepper Hamilton LLP. The National Center for Science Education (NCSE) acted as consultants for the plaintiffs. 

The defendants were represented by the Thomas More Law Center (a non-profit organization which uses litigation to promote "the religious freedom of Christians and time-honored family values"). The Foundation for Thought and Ethics, publisher of the textbook Of Pandas and People, tried to join the lawsuit as a defendant but was denied.

The suit (in the case of Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al.) was brought in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania and tried in a bench trial from September 26, 2005 to November 4, 2005 before Judge John E. Jones III. On December 20, 2005 Judge Jones issued his 139-page findings of fact and decision, ruling that the Dover mandate was unconstitutional, and barred Intelligent Design from being taught in public school science classrooms.

The summary of Judge Jones’ decision is as follows: 

Teaching intelligent design in public school biology classes violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (and Article I, Section 3 of the Pennsylvania State Constitution) because intelligent design is not science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents.”

The then current Dover school board president stated that the board did not intend to appeal the ruling.

 In the November 2005 elections, none of the members of the Dover School Board who voted for the intelligent design policy were re-elected and a new school board, which rejected the policy, took office. This effectively precluded the possibility of an appeal to a higher court.

At issue here is the distinction between Intelligent Design as religious faith, and Intelligent Design as a viable alternative scientific hypothesis to the Theory of Evolution.