2 of 2

It is unclear if the science standards writing team will include intelligent design in its proposal or if such a standard would even be approved by the full board of education. School Board president Sheets told The Washington Times that the 19-member board recently passed new math and English standards unanimously. That may not be the case with science.

Conservative politicians in the state legislature are now preparing to ensure that they have a say in science standards. Twin bills in the Ohio House of Representatives and Senate (House Bill 484 and Senate Bill 222) would require the board of education's science standard to pass the General Assembly.

"It's not about presenting one side of the story but all relevant information, particularly in an area where there's so many values," said Republican senator Jim Jordan, who sponsored the bill. "There are many intelligent folks who happen to think differently, and all those ideas should be explored."

Republican representative Linda Reidelbach, who sponsored House Bill 484, has also introduced Bill 481, which would encourage schools to teach alternative origin theories so students "understand the full range of scientific views that exist regarding the origins of life, and understand why origins science may generate controversy."

Todd Hertz is assistant online editor of Christianity Today.

A Christian Science Monitor commentary posted online today asks, "Are these (intelligent design) ideas a valid scientific theory warranting equal time in biology classes?"

A Columbus Dispatch editorial argues that evolution is fact and intelligent design is not. Therefore, the paper says, the board of education should "strongly endorse the teaching of evolution and ignore the demands of those who purvey pseudoscience."

In an opinion piece for the Dispatch, a member of the advisory committee for the board of education says, "It took three millennia to remove mysticism and supernaturalism from biology and the rest of science. Now, some Ohioans want them back."

Last Wednesday, Slate responded to the Ohio controversy by saying, "ID is a big nothing. It's non-living, non-breathing proof that religion has surrendered its war against science."

Slate posted an overview and critique of the ID movement last February by Northern Illinois University professor Larry Arnhart titled "Assault on Evolution."

Christianity Today's Books & Culture Corner responded to the article.

Larry Arnhart took part in an exchange with Intelligent Design supporters Michael Behe and William Dembski for the November 2000 issue of First Things.

Coverage of the ID movement in Books & Culture, a Christianity Today sister publication, includes:

Creation by Design | Is the intelligent-design movement asking natural scientists to work outside their proper focus? by Alan G. Padgett (Jul/Aug 2000)

Tower of Babel | The Evidence Against the New Creationism (Sep/Oct 1999)

The Unthinkable | A review of Paul Davies's The Fifth Miracle: The Search for the Origin and Meaning of Life by William A. Dembski (Sep/Oct 1999)

The Design Debate | Does "chance" rule out God? Does near-impossibility require him? by Michael J. Behe and Rebecca J. Flietstra (Sep/Oct 1998)

Christianity Today has also covered the Intelligent Design Movement and its controversies. In 1999, CT writer Tony Carnes covered the effect ID was having in Kansas.

first page |  2 of 2

share this page

February (Web-only) 2002, Vol. 46