The debate over evolution grabs political headlines every so often, but more often in Kansas than elsewhere. Evolution is unique among scientific subjects in that it seems to be the only one which people attempt to thwart politically. You never see anyone working to repeal the 'law' of gravity or eliminate teaching atomic theory — but evolution does raise some people's ire, especially when you mix that subject with public schools.
Eliminating Evolution in the Science Curriculum
Back in August of 1999, the Kansas State Board of Education made national and international headlines by rejecting evolution and the Big Bang theory as real science. The 10-member board voted 6-4 to eliminate these topics from the science curriculum. Contrary to some reports, the board did not ban teaching those subjects, but what they did was nearly the same. By eliminating any mention of them from the required science curriculum and from tests for graduating students, they also eliminated any need to study them. Teachers would need to focus on those topics which were tested for graduation, sacrificing evolution and the Big Bang out of necessity.
Fortunately, the decision was reversed in 2000 — after the original change was made, supporters of strong science standards mobilized across the state. In the following elections, five of those ten positions were up for re-election, including four of those who had voted to eliminate evolution. Only one anti-science candidate, Steve Abrams, retained his seat. Unfortunately, threats to science and science teaching keep reoccurring regularly because other anti-science candidates get elected.
Creationist War Against Evolution, Science, Reality
Creationists, such as Board Member Abrams (a former head of the state Republican Party) praised the decision as a victory in the 'war' against evolutionists. Despite numerous corrections by scientists, Evolution Deniers still try to get the public to identify evolution with Social Darwinism. Thus, evolution is described as the source of communism, nazism, racism, and every manner of social ill possible — and that's why people are taught to think of themselves as being in a "war" against evolution.
Instead of being indoctrinated into such evils, creationists want children to believe that God made them and every other species individually for a purpose. According to them, this is the only possible way for children to feel "special" and feel like they are important. If they learn that the human species evolved naturally, then the result of that will be more Columbine-like massacres of students by students. For example, Tom DeLay, Majority Whip of the US House of Representaives, said this in response to the Columbine tragedy: "Our school systems teach the children that they are nothing but glorified apes who have evolutionized out of some primordial soup of mud."
Creationists do not want children to think that a divine power might be behind the Big Bang or evolution of species because that opens the possibility that God might not exist — after all, no scientific theories today make any reference to God. Creationism maintains that God created everything, a belief which leaves no room for an explanation of the existence and nature of things without reference to God. If a child learns science the child may one day conclude that God is an unnecessary hypothesis.
Evolution Denial Around America
Kansas is not the only state to experience debates like this. For years Alabama required a disclaimer be pasted inside science textbooks, stating that evolution is "a controversial theory some scientists present as a scientific explanation for the origin of living things. ...No one was present when life first appeared on earth. Therefore, any statement about life's origins should be considered as theory, not fact." In New Mexico, it took evolution supporters almost four years to change science standards that required the teaching of alternative theories of life's origins.
Introduced into the 2001-2002 session of Ohio's General Assembly was Bill 481, ostensibly created to "enhance the effectiveness of science education." What is specifically tried to do, however, is include the discredited idea of "Intelligent Design" in public school classrooms. This anti-science bill confused evolution with ideas about the origin of life. It is rare for public schools to do much teaching about evolution because it is such a controversial issue — but teaching current scientific theories on how life first developed would be even more unusual. So why draft a law about it?
Anti-Naturalism is Anti-Science
Creationists trying to argue that their efforts are really pro-science and not at all pro-religion frequently argue that they are trying to counteract the invalid "naturalistic" assumptions which lie behind evolution. What these people do not understand is that science is, by definition, naturalistic — science is founded upon the premise of repeatable events and testable predictions, neither of which are possible in a supernaturalistic context.
Thus, when they argue that "good science" does not proceed from any philosophical assumptions, they are either lying or they simply do not know what science is all about. Science is naturalistic, and necessarily so. Intelligent Design is not naturalistic — it makes no testable predictions and explains no repeatable phenomena. It is not science by any stretch of the imagination, and as such does not belong in science classes.
Strictly speaking, there are no non-naturalistic, scientific theories for the origins of life. Thus, if any school is going to say anything about how life originated or how life has developed, only naturalistic, scientific theories can be discussed.
