Anti-Science bill in Indiana.....

This is a petition to show support of Senate Bill 89. It is very important that our children in public schools are afforded the same advantages as those at private schools when it comes to learning about the origin of life, which is the basis of all sciences, proven or otherwise.

The proposal doesn't require any school district to teach creationism and allows them to continue with their current science classes, Kruse said."This does not do away with the teaching of evolution," he said. "This provides another alternative to evolution so our children are being exposed to more than one view, which I think is healthy for them."

Never mind the constitutionality. I'm just wondering if they'll have any time to teach science in science class.

If school boards allowed the teaching of creation science, any student, regardless of relgion, could pass the class by demonstrating that they understood what was taught. That's not establishing religion in America. ... More than 50 percent of our school's students (1,000-plus) petitioned for creation science inclusion in the curriculum. ...If the peopl eof Indiana want something from their government, it is the government's duty to represent its people.

One day after celebrating Mass, his con-celebrant asked him how, as a devout Christian, he could subscribe to such non-literal biblical viewpoints. Lemaitre replied: "The Bible teaches you as much about science as a quadratic equation teaches you about God. Both are pathways to the same truth."

As a Christian, I am deeply disappointed that our Senate thought it was wise to ignore a U.S. Supreme Court ruling and made allowance for a Christian Fundamentalist belief to be taught in our science classes. On top of that, to make this bill look less intolerant of other religious beliefs, various religious beliefs concerning origins of life are to be taught. How dare they expose our Christian children to potential spiritual crisis and family conflict.

What we do need to do is treat macroevolution (one species evolving from another) as a science and not the belief system as it is now taught in science class. If it were evaluated using the scientific method it would be rejected.

Creationists have been forced to accept micro-evolution. bacteria evolve before our eyes. The pastor does not think that macro-evolution explains the origins of life. (That's the theory that two different species have a common ancestor.) How does the reverend and his biology teachers explain the fact that the genetic blueprint of the chimpanzee and humans are 96 percent identical?

As a Christian, I am deeply disappointed that our Senate thought it was wise to ignore a U.S. Supreme Court ruling and made allowance for a Christian Fundamentalist belief to be taught in our science classes. On top of that, to make this bill look less intolerant of other religious beliefs, various religious beliefs concerning origins of life are to be taught.The Pilgrims came to this country to be able to practice their religion freely and not be forced into a specific belief system. If we allow science based on a religious belief to be taught in a core course instead of an elective course, we are forcing children to learn those beliefs. I learned in school that in this country, people are not required to have a religion or learn about a religion or religious beliefs. They are free to believe or not believe as they choose. Has that changed?The purpose of science education is to teach the leading ideas of science and this includes the theory of evolution which explains the diversity of life, not the origin of life. Creation science is not a leading idea of science, is based on a religious belief, and therefore has no place in a required class.

In 1791, the Bill of Rights was ratified and the very first one protects our freedom of religion. If we allow science based on a religious belief to be taught in a core course instead of an elective course, we are forcing children to learn those beliefs and taking away their freedom to choose. Historically in our country, Christianity hasn't always been accommodating when other religions wish to freely practice their own religions or when people choose not to practice a religion. Jesus did not teach his disciples to force religion onto others or force others to listen to religious beliefs.

The purpose of science education is to teach the leading ideas of science and this includes the theory of evolution which explains the diversity of life, not the origin of life. Creation science is not a leading idea of science, but is a minority religious belief and therefore has no place in a required class.

1 Feb 2012 Indianapolis Star, Indiana
Kruse said he is aware of the precedent but isn't sure it would survive today."This is a different Supreme Court," he said. "This Supreme Court could rule differently."Sen. Tim Skinner, D-Terre Haute, asked whether Indiana is ready for the lengthy legal battle that could follow."If we get sued," he asked, "who is going to pay for the lawsuit?"The answer to Skinner's question might help explain why Kruse felt the need to put creationism into state law.Technically, a school district could teach creationism now -- and some do."As far as I know," said Mount Vernon Community School Corporation Superintendent William Riggs, "we've always been allowed to do that."Riggs said Mount Vernon High School's biology class already teaches creationism alongside evolution. "We've been doing this for years."Riggs said the school teaches them as "two theories of the origins of life" and said that in literature classes students often learn about the Bible and the Quran. "The idea is to get kids to think."But districts such as Mount Vernon potentially open themselves up to costly lawsuits. Kruse's bill gives those districts and any other that choose to teach creationism some legal cover -- and likely would draw the state into their defense.

Indianapolis (AP) 31 Jan 2012
The proposal doesn't require any school district to teach creationism and allows them to continue with their current science classes, Kruse said."This does not do away with the teaching of evolution," he said. "This provides another alternative to evolution so our children are being exposed to more than one view, which I think is healthy for them."

As a Christian, I am deeply disappointed that our Senate thought it was wise to ignore a U.S. Supreme Court ruling and made allowance for a Christian Fundamentalist belief to be taught in our science classes. On top of that, to make this bill look less intolerant of other religious beliefs, various religious beliefs concerning origins of life are to be taught.In 1791, the Bill of Rights was ratified and the very first one protects our freedom of religion. If we allow a religious belief to be presented as science in a core course instead of an elective course, we are forcing children to learn those beliefs and taking away their freedom to choose not to learn about other religions. Historically in our country, Christianity hasn't always been accommodating when other religions wish to freely practice or not practice a religion. We don't need unnecessary conflict in the classrooms. Jesus did not teach his disciples to force religion onto others or force others to listen to religious beliefs.The purpose of science education is to teach the leading ideas of science and this includes the theory of evolution which explains the diversity of life, not the origin of life. Creation science is not a leading idea of science, but is a minority religious belief and therefore has no place in a required class.Senator Kruse was quoted in the February 1, 2012, Indianapolis Star as saying, "I believe in creation," Kruse said, "and I believe it deserves to be taught in our public schools."The first four tenets of Scientific Creationism: The physical universe of space, time, matter and energy has not always existed, but was supernaturally created by a transcendent personal Creator who alone has existed from eternity.
The phenomenon of biological life did not develop by natural processes from inanimate systems but was specially and supernaturally created by the Creator.
Each of the major kinds of plants and animals was created functionally complete from the beginning and did not evolve from some other kind of organism. Changes in basic kinds since their first creation are limited to "horizontal" changes (variations) within the kinds, or "downward" changes (e.g., harmful mutations, extinctions).
The first human beings did not evolve from an animal ancestry, but were specially created in fully human form from the start. Furthermore, the "spiritual" nature of man (self-image, moral consciousness, abstract reasoning, language, will, religious nature, etc.) is itself a supernaturally created entity distinct from mere biological life.These are religious views, not science. Required core classes are not the place to present religious views. Schools that are presenting religious views in core classes should be asked to stop and use elective classes only.