PRO & CON: ; Should W.Va. public schools teach 'intelligent design?'; YES

• Published in: Sunday gazette-mail
• Main Author: William S. Harris and John H. Calvert
• Format: Newspaper Article
• Language: English
• Published: Charleston, W.V Charleston Newspapers 26.01.2003

The design versus no design question is important to culture because the answers have enormous and contradictory religious implications. The naturalistic claim of no design supports (but does not require) a belief in atheism, agnosticism and secular humanism. The claim of design supports (but does not require) belief in a God or gods. The controversy arises because the two views are not allowed to compete fairly on a level playing field in the public arena. Proponents of the naturalistic view say that the pro- religious implications of design disqualifies it as a legitimate scientific explanation. (1) Substitute teachings that life is not designed with teachings that present the scientific evidence on both sides of that issue; (2) Delay the teaching of evolution and origins science until children reach the age and maturity sufficient to understand the scientific concepts and their implications; (3) Encourage teachers to present all of the relevant evidence regarding origins objectively and without religious, naturalistic or philosophic bias or assumption; and (4) Require disclosure of material assumptions that form the basis for explanations about our origins. The scientific mainstream's response to these recommendation includes the standard litany of superficial objections that divert attention from the real issues. They claim we have a "hidden agenda" to replace evolution with the biblical account of Genesis. This is not true. For over three years, IDnet's mission has been to expose hidden agendas - to eliminate naturalistic and religious assumptions in origins science and to promote scientific objectivity. This will satisfy the constitutional mandate of state neutrality between religion and nonreligion. Science should care nothing about the religious or anti-religious implications of the evidence. It should engage in an objective search for the truth, particularly in the study of origins.