Is Kitzmiller the end of ID?

[juliod]

I've just finished reading the descision in Kitzmiller v Dover Area School Board. As a lot of people are discovering, it's a very interesting read. And very readable too, unexpectedly. I think it important for anyone interested in these debates to read it in it's entirety. It's 139 (short) pages (double spaced and wide margins).

I think it is critical for anyone who supports ID or creationism to read this decision. It is absolutely damning on ID, the leaders of the ID movement, and ID's supporters. If you don't read and digest the lessons of this case, you will walk right into the same wall.

One of the main findings of the judge is how fundementalist political movements evolve over time. Since about the 1920's they have consistently sought to enforce religion by legislation, with varying success. The judge traces this history through creationism, creation science, and now to "Intelligent Design".

Since this verdict will not be appealed (due to the diselection of the relevant school board members) the decision document will not be superceeded by higher court rulings. The analysis by this judge, and it is impressively comprehensive and thorough, will remain a major precedent.

An since ID is so thoroughly discredited in this case it seems likely to me that the fundementalists will discard it as a poltical ploy. What will be the next thing?

BTW, Creationists, fundementalists, and christians in general should read this document with great care. Strewn through it is words and phrases like "mendacious", "blatant lying", "untruthful", and as I'm sure you've read, "breathtaking inanity". Is this how a religion should be regarded?

DanZ

[micatala]

For those interested. Here is a link to a PDF file version:

http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller ... er_342.pdf

An since ID is so thoroughly discredited in this case it seems likely to me that the fundementalists will discard it as a poltical ploy. What will be the next thing?

Good question. I have a hard time believing they will just up and give up. However, as I noted in the other Kitzmiller thread, there is at least one suggestion from a very conservative anti-evolutionist (Cal Thomas) to do exactly that.

I noted with interest the response of conservative columnist Cal Thomas to the verdict.

To summarize (from memory), he is ostensibly happy with the verdict, even though he is very anti-evolution. He goes on to say that religious conservatives should 'give up' trying to reform the public school system, and instead should abandon it in favor of private schools or home schooling. He of course, through in some slanted mis-characterization of public schools while he was at it.

How many people might follow this advice, I don't know, but it is true that many conservative Christians have already abandoned the public school system, and so this is not an idle suggestion. We might wonder what the consequences would be if there was an accelerated exodus from the public school system by this population.

If this does happen, we might expect more vociferous cries for vouchers or other types of support for non-public schools, sectarian or otherwise.

[micatala]

I am even now going through the decision.

The first interesting note is the extent to which the decision supports the applicability of the Establishment Clause to the ID situation. The judge seems to say that it does not matter that ID is not 'overtly religious' or 'overtly CHristian or Creationist.' What matters is the purpose and effect of the proposal to teach ID. If the intention is to promote religion, and the effect is to give a viewpoint favored by one religion preference, then the Establishment Clause is applicable.

If this case does remain a precedent, it certainly does not give the ID folks much hope for getting their 'Trojan Horse' in the door elsewhere.

The course also addressed the issue of how ID plays out in the public arena. ID has thrived, in my view, partly because most people aren't paying attention. The decision seems to imply that in order to pass muster, the ID proponents must do more than convince the average Joe that all they are doing is asking for fair treatment. They must convince a person who is reasonably knowledgeable about the history of the creationism and its relationship to ID. I would hold that anyone who is aware of this history cannot but concude that ID is an outgrowth of creationism. This decision seems to set the precedent that ID will have to live with this association 'forevermore.'

It is also interesting to remember that the teaching of evolution was outlawed in many locales into the 60's. We didn't here much about 'balanced treatment' of the issue in those days. The anti-evolutionists are only asking for 'balance' now because they are trying to (IMV) practice deception on the public at large.

More later. Have to pick up the daughter from violin lessons.

[juliod]

we might expect more vociferous cries for vouchers or other types of support for non-public schools, sectarian or otherwise.

Possibly. But if the reason for removing children to private schools is specifically a religious one (to avoid instruction in evolution) then public support for private schools would be unconstitutional. The voucher argument, like that in Kitzmiller, depends on the theists lying about what their true motives are.

The judge seems to say that it does not matter that ID is not 'overtly religious' or 'overtly CHristian or Creationist.'

But the judge also concludes that ID is overtly religious. I was gratified to read in the descision an essential restatement of my position on ID: that it is nothing other than traditional creationism with the word "god" removed.

DanZ


DanZ

[Cathar1950]

My concern is public education. What happens if people pull out of the educational system? Not that it has been much more then creating fodder for corporate America but Do we need a bunch of schools where kids are taught poorly or crazy ideas? Not that that is not going on in public education. It seems like our schools are nothing more then baby sitting prisons. The rich can always afford good schools. Maybe I will go volunteer as a teachers aid or sub.. It is going to take time from my coffee and reading.

[juliod]

It seems like our schools are nothing more then baby sitting prisons.

That's what 90% of parents want. Notice how in Dover no one knew (or cared) what the school board was doing until they accomplished something really egregous.

OTOH, students everywhere only get out of school what they put into it. We didn't achieve our dominance in science and technology by having the sort of failed public school system that everyone seems to think we have. By and large, our schools are adequate and that may be as good as they can get.

The rich can always afford good schools.

But how does a rich person define "good"? As for education, it means "They give my kid A's". The rich insist on getting what they pay for, and they get it. The result is socially-promoted underachievers like Dubya, and yes, Kerry. Don't envy the rich their educational institutions.

DanZ

[Cathar1950]

juliod wrote:

OTOH, students everywhere only get out of school what they put into it. We didn't achieve our dominance in science and technology by having the sort of failed public school system that everyone seems to think we have. By and large, our schools are adequate and that may be as good as they can get.

True and what the parents put into their kids.
Granted studies have shown that Teachers make a difference, Principles make a difference and so does the Curriculum.
juliod wrote:

But how does a rich person define "good"? As for education, it means "They give my kid A's". The rich insist on getting what they pay for, and they get it. The result is socially-promoted underachievers like Dubya, and yes, Kerry. Don't envy the rich their educational institutions.

Thanks Dan I was trying not to get depressed or morbid.
Schooling in Capitalist America Kids get A's because they do what they are told and have high IQ because they have good grades. That is what the tests measure.
They usually flunk, styful or remove the creative ones.
I don't mean our kids Dan.

[QED]

I think I'll mention this ruling the next time I hear someone saying that evolution is a religion. That banal remark has cropped up in several debates recently and never fails to irritate. Perhaps we can now understand the motive behind pathetic attempts at slandering evolution as being racist. Maybe this will be the next big thing

[steen]

I think we will still hear a few diehard "ID is real" types, but as it no longer serves the creationists goal of putting creationism in the class room, I think the next step (And we have already seen it in the making is "Teach the controversy."

It actually started about 4-5 years ago, as Wells' 10 Questions for your biology teacher" was put on the web, and I see the term show up more and more now.

Cast doubt on Evolution by magnifying every unresolved or hard-to-explain issue and bog down science class in meaningless questions. Then "Satan's message" won't be spread.

Yes, they truly are dishonest loons, the creationists.

[jcrawford]

Since this verdict will not be appealed (due to the diselection of the relevant school board members) the decision document will not be superceeded by higher court rulings. The analysis by this judge, and it is impressively comprehensive and thorough, will remain a major precedent.

An since ID is so thoroughly discredited in this case it seems likely to me that the fundementalists will discard it as a poltical ploy. What will be the next thing?

Since the philosophical, ideological and political position of Judge Jones and the ACLU is comparable to the racist and fascist position apparent in Taney's decision of Dred Scott notoriety, Christians have no recourse but to point out the racist and fascist doctrines inherent in all U.S. government teachings of neo-Darwinist racial theories regarding human descent from common ancestors of African monkeys and apes.