Feb
09

Breaking News: Florida State Senator to Introduce Bill on Intelligent Design

By Tamahome Jenkins · February 9, 2009

Florida State Senator Steven WiseFlorida State Senator Stephen Wise is to introduce a bill this week that would teach Intelligent Design in Florida’s public schools. The timing couldn’t be better considering this Thursday (2/12) is Charles Darwin’s 200th birthday, and EverythingIsHistory.com has invited a guest writer to discuss the argument of Intelligent Design vs. Evolution. No matter what your spiritual belief may be, the fact remains that the theory of evolution is a science, while the theory of intelligent design is based on belief. Throughout history, scientists have stood up to religious leaders who have attacked them with claims of heresy in the face of their observations. Galileo and Copernicus in the 16th century, with their heretical heliocentric claims, at a time when the world believed that God made the Earth the center of the Universe.  It took a couple hundreds years, but eventually the masses came around and accepted what is now considered to be a universal truth.  Similarly, Darwin’s observations on evolution will ultimately be accepted, maybe not as a final factual paradigm, but possibly as the precursor to more advanced theories. For example, the mapping of the human genome has added to the theory of evolution as first presented by Darwin. Over the course of the last 150 years, evolution has not been disproved, only argued against by proponents of intelligent design. Intelligent design on the other hand has been and can be disproved, although I will allow this week’s guest writer to expound on that more. I personally believe that the theory of intelligent design should be taught in public schools, but not as a science, as a humanities course. It belongs in the same class as ancient mythology, as other creation stories have been taught. I feel another fight brewing, as if we’ve seen this before.  I don’t want to be the only one going off on a selfish rant, so please share your opinion in the comments below.

You may also like:

  1. A Definitive Assessment of Intelligent Design vs. Evolution: Part 4 Intelligent Design Apologetics: 3 Gaping Holes in the foundation of...
  2. A Definitive Assessment of Intelligent Design vs. Evolution: Part 2 Specifically Complex: What You Need To Know to Understand Intelligent...
  3. A Definitive Assessment of Intelligent Design vs. Evolution: Part 1 Evolution versus Intelligent Design: Understanding the Science Controversy. In honor...
  4. A Definitive Assessment of Intelligent Design vs. Evolution: Part 3 What You Need to Know about the Foundational Flaw in...

Categories : History Today

Comments

  1. Sharyn says:

    No comment…

  2. Steven says:

    @Sharyn
    People use religion (all religions, not just yours), to explain things that science cannot. As science begins to explain things from a rational point of view, religion is slow to release its grip on the truth (remember, truth does not always equal fact). This has happened in every field of science, you just happen to be alive during the time religion is fighting science in regards to biology.

  3. Sharyn says:

    Look, I hear you loud & clear which is why I said no comment. There are Bible passages which reference things as this but I do not have the time to search for them at this time & I don’t know exactly where they are off the top of my head. I do know that man’s thoughts & ways are not God’s thoughts & ways so no one is going to see eye to eye on that. I will get back to you on that later…

    • Steven says:

      “There are Bible passages which reference things as this…”

      With all due respect to your chosen belief, the Bible is the ultimate form of faith. A person must have a tremendous amount of faith to believe that he/she is reading the pure, unadulterated word of God himself, and not a modified translation meant to benefit man. And that only serves to prove the point that ID is about faith and not science; you had to refer to the Bible to try to “prove” ID, as there is no empirical evidence to support it. I’m sure Galileo had this same conversation in regards to whether or not the earth revolved around the sun. From Wikipedia:

      The geocentric view had been dominant since the time of Aristotle, and the controversy engendered by Galileo’s presentation of heliocentrism as proven fact resulted in the Catholic Church’s prohibiting its advocacy as empirically proven fact, because it was not empirically proven at the time and was contrary to the literal meaning of Scripture.

      Are going to argue that Sun revolves the Earth, now?

Leave a Reply