The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana's top lawyer said Thursday that a Indiana Senate bill that would allow
schools to teach creationism in science classes clearly violates the U.S. Constitution and invites legal challenges.
U.S. Supreme Court precedents "going back many years" have established the unconstitutionality of teaching creationism
in public schools, Ken Falk said.
"The idea that somehow our state legislature can trump the Constitution just doesn't make sense," Falk said
in a news release issued by the ACLU. "When lawmakers propose legislation they clearly know will end up in the courts,
it wastes valuable time and resources, disrespects the legislative process and confuses an already complicated issue."
The Senate Education Committee voted 8-2 Wednesday to send the bill before the full Senate despite experts and even some
senators saying teaching creationism likely would be ruled unconstitutional if challenged in court. The bill's prospects
for advancing to the House weren't certain Thursday. Next Wednesday is the deadline for bills originating in the Senate
to win approval from the full chamber.
Falk said the U.S. Supreme Court in its 1987 case Edwards v. Aguillard struck down a Louisiana statute that required instruction
on evolution to be accompanied by teaching on "creation science." The court found that the Louisiana statute had
no identifiable secular purpose, but that the "pre-eminent purpose of the Louisiana Legislature was clearly to advance
the religious viewpoint that a supernatural being created humankind."
The Indiana Senate bill doesn't require instruction of creationism, but allows it.
In committee debate Wednesday, Sen. Scott Schneider, R-Indianapolis, said there are legitimate questions about the theory
of evolution and that many scientists agree with the concept of intelligent design, the theory that life on Earth is so complex
it had to be created by an intelligent higher power.
"What are we afraid of? Allowing an option for students including creation science as opposed to limiting their exposure?"
Schneider said.
Senate Education Chairman Dennis Kruse, R-Auburn, said he knew of nothing in state law that prohibits public schools from
teaching creationism. He said he sponsored the bill because he believes creationism should be taught among the theories on
the development of life and that the proposal wouldn't force any changes in schools teaching evolution.
Some committee members suggested that they would support amending the bill in the full Senate to instead encourage schools
to teach about the world's religions in literature or history classes. Sen. Luke Kenley, R-Noblesville, voted in favor
of the bill even though it called its current form a "lawyer's dream."
Falk said that since public school curriculum must always serve a secular educational purpose, religion can be taught if
the purpose is to examine religion's role in history, art, literature, society or other secular subjects. He said religion
can only be taught in an objective, unbiased manner that does not promote or criticize any particular religion or set of beliefs.
on Facebook & Twitter
Back to Top
IBJ Conversations
12 Comments
Add Comment
A scientific theory is "an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena." This is distinct from a "hypothesis" which is an explanation that has not yet been tested or confirmed. It's also distinct from a "fact" which is something that can be directly observed and measured. Theories correlate and interpret the facts.
For example, "it is a fact is that fossil skulls have been found that are intermediate in appearance between humans and modern apes." A theory explains why that might be.
A scientific theory is distinct from a scientific law primarily in that a "law" describes how something works; whereas a "theory" explains why something works that way.
In short, while in common discussion, "theory" can mean "wild-ass guess," in science, that's not what "theory" means at all.
Get serious, Legislature. That is what we pay you for, not to make Indiana look like a bunch of idiots run the state. Even if they do.
I think comparative religion should be taught in schools as well. When I was young, it was helpful to me to study and understand the basic tenets of the world's most popular religions. I learned it in social studies classes. I don't know what would prevent that from happening now. But it's not done in science or biology class, it's done in social studies or world history where it has a cultural context, not a scientific context.