The real problem with Darwinism in the public school classroom is that it is often taught in an atheist way. Textbooks by biologists like William Provine and Richard Dawkins routinely assert that evolution has done away with the need for God. The claim is that chance and natural selection have demonstrated that we can have design--or the appearance of design--without a designer. In this sense Darwinism becomes propaganda for atheism.
Typically evangelical Christians seek to counter this atheism by trying to expose the flaws in the Darwinian account of evolution. This explains the appeal of "creation science" and the "intelligent design" (ID) movement. These critiques, however, have not made any headway in the scientific community and they have also failed whenever they have been tried in the courts. Fortunately there is a better way.
Consider this: the First Amendment to the Constitution prohibits public schools from teaching or promoting atheism in any way. How do I know this? Well, the religion clauses of the First Amendment protect the "free exercise" of religion and at the same time forbid the "establishment" of religion. Courts have routinely held that the free exercise clause protects not only religious beliefs but also the absence of religious beliefs. If you are fired from your government job because you are an atheist, your First Amendment rights have been violated. In other words, the term "religion" means not only "religion" but also "atheism."
Yet if the free exercise clause defines religion in a way that includes atheism, then the no-establishment clause must define religion in the same way. So the agencies of government are prohibited from "establishing" not only religion but also atheism. This means that just as a public school teacher cannot advocate Christianity or hand out Bibles to his students, so too public school textbooks and science teachers cannot advocate atheism.
I'd like to see Christian legal groups suing school districts for promoting atheism in the biology classroom. No need to produce creationist or ID critiques of Darwinism. All that is necessary is to parade the atheist claims that have made their way into the biology textbooks and biology lectures. The issue isn't the scientific inadequacy of evolution but the way in which it is being used to undermine religious belief and promote unbelief. If the case can be made that atheism is being advocated in any way, then the textbooks would have to be rewritten and classroom presentations changed to remove the offending material. Schools would be on notice that they cannot use scientific facts to draw metaphysical conclusions in favor of atheism.
In this way Darwinism in the public schools would no longer be a threat to religion in general or Christianity in particular.
Reader Comments ( Page 5 of 68)
61. "I would also point out that as the US has silenced Christianity in the last 60 years, it parallels the new depths of depravity and danger in our culture. For example, abortion, school kids murdering classmates, fatherless child rearing, and out of control sexual activity (and the deadly venereal diseases that accompany that)."
---------------------------------------------
Silenced christianity? Hardly. School kids are murdering classmates because of easy access to firearms. And how about the fundie christian kid who killed at the christian camp? Abortion is legal and safe now, and can hardly be called depravity.
And the vast majority of your "depraved" people are christians. Who is preventing people from going to church? Not our government. You "church" organizations get tax exempt status and amass tons of money, land and who knows what.
Don't give me that crap about silencing religion. Could it be that people are staying away from churches largely because they see christianity for the con that it is?
Linda at 12:56PM on Apr 2nd 2008
62. 31. tay,
i have never been to a church that"forbid" the discussion of darwinism. quiet the contrary. unless it is discussed on its merits or lack thereof then how could christians rightly approach the subject? i think you atatement is really meant to infer that christians did not broi=ch the suject out of ignorance or fear or some other irrational reason. while from a reason standpoint christianity can be defended quiet well. what cannot be defended very well is atheism. did you know that only 2% of americans are strict atheist!! 2% also 8% are reported to be agnostic. so we give you 10% of the population telling the other 90% they are wrong. guess what? i'll side with the 90%. would you?
brian at 12:06PM on Apr 2nd 2008
*******************
Hello brian
As far as my statement about being forbidden to question creationism, I can only speak from my own experience. When we were young, if you were to even question if creation was the truth or not, you would only be met with criticism from adults and other children. You were made to feel that there was something morally wrong with you if you did not believe that the bible was the only truth, and creation was the only beginning. Believe what you want brian, but their entire doctrine is based on fear.
As far as me wanting to side with the majority, no, I'm not a follower. I think for myself.
tay at 12:59PM on Apr 2nd 2008
63. Janesophie-
The sabertooth cat is a fable. When it has been bred in a lab, it will be unveiled as a clone.
Their were few animals in America when it was discovered. The wildeebeast from Africa was dropped off for future food stores as others were, and without a predator, it became the buffalo.
Joseph at 1:02PM on Apr 2nd 2008
64. The way I see it, this whole thing is not about whether atheism is a religion or not, but that atheists for a long time whined that religion was imposing its beliefs on them. In this sense, teaching evolution is imposing atheist beliefs on religous people. What evidence is there, like Mr. D'Souza mentioned, is there that God did not cause the changes that Darwin noticed as "evolution"?
Chris at 1:04PM on Apr 2nd 2008
65. There are two places where the "creation story" should be taught: a church or synagogue or a religion class.
Linda at 1:03PM on Apr 2nd 2008
66. Chris, if you think evolution is gods process, go with it. But it seems, many of you want religion to be the basis of education in the public school system. If Darwin is this big threat to religion, then christianity is not as great as you think.
JefFlyingV at 1:11PM on Apr 2nd 2008
67. Evolution is simply how women procreate, as with strong men in primitive times, or with intelligent men in modern times.
Creationism is simply how naive women are manipulated into procreating with someone other than their husband. To create a more intelligent man, or a more feminine man, etc.
Religion gives people the cloak of secrecy, to manipulate the working class, to breed for better, or for worse.
Joseph at 1:11PM on Apr 2nd 2008
68. Linda:
People stay away from Christianity because it conflicts with their world view. Traditional Christianity requires obedience to authority and adherence to principals followed by the Apostles and Early Church Fathers. Most people are too arrogant to allow God to be the ruler of their lives. It always amazes me how people reject God in life, but feel entitled to heaven in death. The way you live is your answer to God when he asks, “do you love me”.
janesophie1 at 1:12PM on Apr 2nd 2008
69. 52. It's hard to tell when Joseph is being facetious, satirical, or serious.
Mokele-Mobembe at 12:50PM on Apr 2nd 2008
********************
Mokele
I was beginning to think that I was the only one that could see Joseph's maniacal posts. But I see you are also wearing your "crazy decoder goggles".
tay at 1:15PM on Apr 2nd 2008
70. "The sabertooth cat is a fable. When it has been bred in a lab, it will be unveiled as a clone.
Their were few animals in America when it was discovered. The wildeebeast from Africa was dropped off for future food stores as others were, and without a predator, it became the buffalo."
BWHAHAHA. Joseph are you real?? The sabretooth cats were a "fable." So what, the fossil remains of these predators are all faked? What the hell for? Seriously, too funny.
And who exactly "dropped off" the wildebeest? Columbus? for future food stores? It "became" the buffalo?? BWHAHAH! Aside from your whole idea here being demonstrably wrong, do you know what its called when one species become another? EVOLUTION!
Grant LaFleche at 1:34PM on Apr 2nd 2008
71. Janesophie=
The answer is yes, when it is mutual.
The answer is no, when it is religion.
Joseph at 1:17PM on Apr 2nd 2008
72. Tay=
You must be Christian, because you don't have a clue!
Joseph at 1:19PM on Apr 2nd 2008
73. Joseph
I have a clue, that is why I am not going to get into this with you.
tay at 1:21PM on Apr 2nd 2008
74. #69
Joseph
I am not sure to what you are referring. Can you clarify?
janesophie1 at 1:20PM on Apr 2nd 2008
75. Irreducible complexity is nothing more than saying "I can't figure out how it happened (and won't really try) so it must have been God". Some may find that sufficient but many of us do not. Volumes of scholarly articles exist that knock down every one of the examples that Behe, et. al. have put forth.
It is shocking that in the 21st century we are told that as many Americans believe in UFO's as believe in evolutionary theory. In the midwest they have opened a creationism 'museum' that essentially teaches that the Flinstones was a documentary.
When churches agree to teach comparative theology and natural science from the pulpit, then we should revisit the issue of exposing students to creationism in the classroom.
Steve at 1:23PM on Apr 2nd 2008