CreationismEssay Preview: CreationismReport this essayPart I.First off the Judeo-Christian views of creation were slowly changing even before Darwin came along. Although his discoveries and theories did go along way in changing peoples views. Judeo-Christian views revolved around the “Garden of Eden” idea. That the universe had one creator and he formed all of the earth and the living organisms that live on it. Never did it cross their mind that it is possible for organisms to change over time or become extinct. Even to this day a lot of creationists feel and try to show how there was no need to change traditional belief. The changing force in their thought-process was the fossil record undeniably showed that older forms were going extinct while newer forms appeared.
The work that Darwin and Wallace did went strides to prove their beliefs, and it also proved to be a very challenging idea to take in physiologically for some religions. They proposed that the change in organisms fossils could be explained in terms of differential reproduction that was based on heritable variations (i.e., natural selection). A fully natural explanation for natures diversity was now available for consideration. To some, this meant that God was no longer required to explain the formation of new species. Most disturbing of all, God was not even required to explain the formation of humankind.
Part II.On March 22nd, 1925, Tennessee passed the Butler Act, making it unlawful in public schools “to teach any theory that denies the story of divine creation as taught by the Bible and to teach instead that man was descended from a lower order of animals.” The Tennessee law was part of a national legislative campaign fathered by three-time losing presidential contender William Jennings Bryan. Within a decade a pair of court cases overturned the “equal space” law, as well. But the modern assault on evolutionary theory pretty much started in the Tennessee legislature on this date, March 22, back in 1925.
The circumstances revolving around the act being passed was the willingness of teachers to accept and teach the ways of creationism from the bible. Parents were not happy this was being taught and neither were the school boards. This became apparent to the public forcing schools and state legislature to take action. Thus making the act and then later passing it.
(a) Scopes who was voluntarily arrested for teaching evolution became nationwide news. The reaction to this surprising publicity showed that many Americans felt the basics of their religious beliefs were at stake in this battle. To some, the trial was seen as a means of either confirming or denying their understanding of the Scriptures. Clarence Darrow is credited with having outmaneuvered such intolerance when he set for his expert witnesses to give their scientific evidences for evolution to the news reporters covering the trial. By this, Darrow managed to have the theory of evolution circulated to the farthest limits of the civilized world. Just as significantly, this was accomplished without any arguments against evolution being mentioned. Thus evolution appeared to be based on undeniable evidence.
(b) The participants in the 1925 trial were (1) John Scopes, a high school football coach and substitute science teacher, (2) William Jennings Bryan, the great fundamentalist orator and three times presidential candidate, who prosecuted the case against Scopes, and (3) Clarence Darrow, the eminent trial lawyer, who defended Scopes. (4) The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed suit, challenging the constitutionality of the Act.
The atmosphere of the town was not very good, and people thought that if the good publicity got out about the trial that the excitement along with the population might go up again whose population had fallen from 3,000 in the 1890s to 1,800 in 1925.
Part III.4. Scientific creationism differs from conventional science in numerous ways. One obvious difference is the way scientists and creationists deal with error. Science is committed, at least in principle, to the evidence. Creationism is connected to principle, as evidenced by the statements of certainty essential by various creationist organizations and the professions of faith made by individual creationists. Because creationism is first and foremost a matter of the bible, evidence from the natural world can only be of secondary importance. Controlling systems like creationism tend to encourage in their adherents a strange view of truth. Many well-known creationists apparently have the same view of truth as political radicals: whatever advances the cause is true; whatever damages the cause is false. From this viewpoint, errors should be covered up where possible and only acknowledged when failure to do so threatens greater damage to the cause. In science, fame accrues to those who overturn errors. In dogmatic systems, one who unnecessarily exposes an error to the public is a traitor or an apostate.
5. The creationists were William Paley Argument who asserted that Gods existence could be proved by examining his works. Progressive Creationists such as Dr. Hugh Ross, of Reasons to believe ministries, have no problems with scientific information concerning the age of the earth, or the long period of time it has taken for the earth to come to its current form. Henry Morris, founder and recently-retired president of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR), and arguably the most influential creationist of the late 20th century. Also John C Whitcomb.
6. In the McLean vs. Arkansas Board of Education the trial was all about the teaching of evolution. This was deemed unacceptable by the school board of Arkansas. Back then it was made clear that not only the Arkansas schools would not condone the such teachings but more and more schools were surfacing, and making conflict. Parents and school board members were the mainly the people who didnt want it taught. This case went to court. Arkansas was outraged and said that these teachings violated Act 590. The Overton decision was the ruling in the case. Overton was the judge in the case. He ruled against the plaintiffs saying that Act 590 was “unconstitutional.” The criteria used by Overton was his own and he used his own judgment. He went through each section of the text and decided what could stay and what couldnt.
The Arkansas school board issued a news release:
Dear students,
Please don’t feel misled by your choice. We are moving the case that has just been decided and are now calling for state law-enforcement to intervene in the case and stop this litigation.
Your attorneys will be defending the case here in the federal district court in Houston. It is called the McLean case. Overton was found guilty of a charge of violating the First Amendment and the First Amendment First Amendment, Section 11.14, which allows for school districts to refuse state requests for records, records, or records pertaining to a public program. The evidence presented here was that over four years ago an Arkansas state official sent over an email to seven schools stating that a group of the Arkansas high school students had not received the school’s required data sheets. Overton’s lawyers said that, even now, students have an opportunity for public access to the public, and that they have been encouraged by the emails. At the time, Arkansas Secretary of Education Paul Pimentel said that under the law, “there is no public access to school records. It’s open for all except students or parents. The only places where the data is not available are out of schools. If the data is there … then there is public access to information. To the extent there is free access to it, it’s going to be a public access access. ”
The Arkansas school board was also involved in a lawsuit challenging the use of FOIA as information.
Since October of 2015, Arkansas teachers have applied for the use of FOIA to have access to all records in their schools.
In September of 2015, Arkansas students received FOIA requests from the public. They were denied. The ACLU filed a civil suit against the school board claiming that the Freedom of Information Act and state law did not require that teachers should have access to any records and in particular to information that would disclose information that the state’s FOIA requests would not reveal.
In August 2015, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s Director of Human Resources and Services filed a discrimination complaint against Arkansas schools claiming “the Arkansas superintendent is using the school’s FOIA efforts to ensure that his schools make clear to the public what is available to children’s use and not what is on them.”
The ACLU has filed similar civil suits against state school boards in Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, Houston, Houston, and New Orleans, among others. In May, the U.S. Department of Education announced that the Department of Education would review and take corrective action to ensure that schools are provided appropriate, legal channels to obtain the FOIA information. In 2013 the Justice Department announced that it would intervene in the McLean case.
The Arkansas Education Department is expected to issue a news release about their move regarding over 4 years later.
The American Association of Teachers (AAS) has responded on their behalf:
The Arkansas Department of Education’s Open Public Records Law now provides that information to U.S. state agencies without approval by the Arkansas board of state education. Under this rule, schools are not subject to FOIA lawsuits. As stated herein, the Arkansas AAS position is that they are not subject to these laws
The Arkansas school board issued a news release:
Dear students,
Please don’t feel misled by your choice. We are moving the case that has just been decided and are now calling for state law-enforcement to intervene in the case and stop this litigation.
Your attorneys will be defending the case here in the federal district court in Houston. It is called the McLean case. Overton was found guilty of a charge of violating the First Amendment and the First Amendment First Amendment, Section 11.14, which allows for school districts to refuse state requests for records, records, or records pertaining to a public program. The evidence presented here was that over four years ago an Arkansas state official sent over an email to seven schools stating that a group of the Arkansas high school students had not received the school’s required data sheets. Overton’s lawyers said that, even now, students have an opportunity for public access to the public, and that they have been encouraged by the emails. At the time, Arkansas Secretary of Education Paul Pimentel said that under the law, “there is no public access to school records. It’s open for all except students or parents. The only places where the data is not available are out of schools. If the data is there … then there is public access to information. To the extent there is free access to it, it’s going to be a public access access. ”
The Arkansas school board was also involved in a lawsuit challenging the use of FOIA as information.
Since October of 2015, Arkansas teachers have applied for the use of FOIA to have access to all records in their schools.
In September of 2015, Arkansas students received FOIA requests from the public. They were denied. The ACLU filed a civil suit against the school board claiming that the Freedom of Information Act and state law did not require that teachers should have access to any records and in particular to information that would disclose information that the state’s FOIA requests would not reveal.
In August 2015, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s Director of Human Resources and Services filed a discrimination complaint against Arkansas schools claiming “the Arkansas superintendent is using the school’s FOIA efforts to ensure that his schools make clear to the public what is available to children’s use and not what is on them.”
The ACLU has filed similar civil suits against state school boards in Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, Houston, Houston, and New Orleans, among others. In May, the U.S. Department of Education announced that the Department of Education would review and take corrective action to ensure that schools are provided appropriate, legal channels to obtain the FOIA information. In 2013 the Justice Department announced that it would intervene in the McLean case.
The Arkansas Education Department is expected to issue a news release about their move regarding over 4 years later.
The American Association of Teachers (AAS) has responded on their behalf:
The Arkansas Department of Education’s Open Public Records Law now provides that information to U.S. state agencies without approval by the Arkansas board of state education. Under this rule, schools are not subject to FOIA lawsuits. As stated herein, the Arkansas AAS position is that they are not subject to these laws