Creationism ruling is misunderstood

One of the most misunderstood rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court was the June 19, 1987, ruling on the teaching of creation science. That misunderstanding is even reflected in the headlines in the Feb. 26 Daily Herald: “Court barred creation from science classes in ’87.”.

The court actually ruled that, “Teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind to schoolchildren might be validly done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction.”

Justice Scalia and Chief Justice Rehnquist noted that, “The people of Louisiana, . . . are quite entitled to have whatever scientific evidence there may be against evolution presented in their schools. . . .” Furthermore, the majority opinion left at least two alternatives to the current indoctrination in evolution. First, the right of teachers to teach “a variety of scientific theories” and second, the right to encourage “the teaching of “all scientific theories . . . about origins.”

Consider also the National Academy of Sciences Resolution of April 1976: “The search for knowledge and understanding of the physical universe and of the living things that inhabit it should be conducted under conditions of intellectual freedom, without religious, political or ideological restrictions. . . . That freedom of inquiry and dissemination of ideas require that those so engaged be free to search where their inquiry leads.”

Earlier in the century at the Scopes Trial, Clarence Darrow reportedly said, “. . . let the children have their minds kept open . . . close no doors to their knowledge... shut no door to them . . . let them have both evolution and creation . . . the truth will win out in the end.” I think it’s that last phrase that scares the evolutionists so much they advocate indoctrination rather than education.

Walt Sivertsen

Grayslake