Federal Court Rejects Intelligent Design Curriculum

(CNSNews.com) - A Pennsylvania school system may not include intelligent design in its science curriculum, a federal court ruled Tuesday. U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III said intelligent design is not a scientific concept.

The ruling is a victory for the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania and Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which argued that intelligent design is religion in disguise.

"This is a tremendous victory for public schools and religious freedom," said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director. "It means that school board members have no right to impose their personal religious beliefs on students through the school curriculum."

The ACLU and Americans United sued the Dover Area School Board on behalf of parents who objected to having intelligent design taught as an alternative to the theory of evolution. Intelligent design says an intelligent cause rather than natural selection explains the origins of life.

In his ruling, Jones agreed with both groups, saying the Dover school board violated the so-called separation of church and state by voting to introduce intelligent design (ID) into science classes by requiring students to listen to a disclaimer that was critical of the theory of evolution.

"The disclaimer's plain language, the legislative history, and the historical context in which the ID Policy arose, all inevitably lead to the conclusion that Defendants consciously chose to change Dover's biology curriculum to advance religion," said Jones.

"We have been presented with a wealth of evidence which reveals that the District's purpose was to advance creationism, an inherently religious view, both by introducing it directly under the label ID and by disparaging the scientific theory of evolution, so that creationism would gain credence by default as the only apparent alternative to evolution..." added Jones.

Lynn said supporters of intelligent design should give up on introducing the theory introduced to public school science classes.

"Public schools should teach science in science class, and let parents make their own decisions about religion," said Lynn. "It's a simple idea that the Religious Right has never been able to grasp."

But an education reform foundation found in a recent study that most states do "an awful job" of addressing evolution and the rest of science.

"Certainly some states do an awful job addressing evolution, but for the most part these states also do an awful job addressing the rest of science," said Dr. Paul Gross, former provost of the University of Virginia, who led the review on behalf of the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, which sponsored and published the study.

"The good news is that, despite the well-funded and politically-motivated attack on the teaching of evolution, most states have held firm and continue to instruct students in the fundamentals of evolutionary biology," added Gross.

His study gave schools in nearly half of the nation failing grades in a new review of statewide academic standards for primary-secondary school science.

"At a time of increasing anxiety about our children's readiness in math and science, U.S. science education is under assault, with 'discovery learning' attacking on one flank and the Discovery Institute on the other," said Chester E. Finn, Jr. of the Fordham Institute.

"The National Academies, Thomas Friedman, and others have called on Americans to 'get serious' about science, but few state standards can fairly be described as serious. We all know that great standards don't guarantee a good education for a state's students, but weak standards make it much less likely," Finn added.

CNSNews.com Senior Editor Melanie Hunter contributed to this report.

See Earlier Story:
Pennsylvania Parents Sue Schools over 'Intelligent Design' (Dec. 14, 2004)

Subscribe to the free CNSNews.com daily E-brief.

E-mail a comment or news tip to Melanie Hunter.

Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.