Welcome to The Senate Site

Tuesday, November 15, 2005

Teaching Evolution

By Chris Buttars
Senate District 10

I’m asked on an ongoing basis if I plan to introduce a bill concerning the Utah State Board of Education’s position on teaching evolution. The answer to that question is yes. I’ve opened a bill file and I’m currently working on the language. The bill text is not yet public and will remain private until I’m satisfied that 1) the intent of the bill is clear, 2) how it will be administered is also clear, and 3) it can withstand a court challenge.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Senator Buttars' attitude about evolution vs. "divine design" is completely off base. Tell me this Senator - can you prove any aspect of "divine design"? No. Then it's not science - in any way shape or form. I don't care how many people believe in the concept - it doesn't make it so.

11/15/2005 6:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I support the Utah State Board of Education's position. I don't want my child learning somebody else's religious mumbo-jumbo in a science class. If they want to preach Intelligent Design in CHURCH, by all means do so, but leave the schools out of it.

11/16/2005 7:31 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The text book would be cheap! :)

Everybody's got a copy of the old testament right? ..or do we need both old AND new?

What about the BOM, triple combo too? Yikes!

Now that I think about it, this could get expensive. My poor little girls back. Its not "designed" for heavy backpacks.

At any rate, I think its a good thing. Children shouldn't be left to wonder about anything. Unanswered questions only lead to trouble.

Thank you Chris for supporting family values in this way. I work hard to make sure my children know that I am their master. I must be able to answer all questions. Imagine the hypocracy of not being able to explain why the fossile record in incomplete between the Permian and the Triassic time periods - clear PROOF of intelligent design!

11/16/2005 4:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have no problem with students being introduced to the idea that an intelligent force may have guided the evolutionary process.

It's an interesting idea.

No religious ideology need be taught, beyond a respect for ideas and the value of searching for truth. What's so scary about that?

11/16/2005 6:11 PM  
Blogger Kevin said...

The curriculum should be in the hands of the teachers not the politicians.

When politicians dictate the curriculum they invariably end up elevating themselves or their politic beliefs to be the divine force behind creation.

The debate will be a waste of Utah Taxpayer's money, but will probably be quite humorous.

11/16/2005 11:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Senator Buttars has a problem with the constitutionally established and elected board of education he should run for the position of state school board member. He shouldn't try to usurp their excercise of general control and supervision of public education through legislation .

11/17/2005 11:09 AM  
Blogger didymus said...

I have made a few comments on this bill on my blog: http://evolutioninutah.blogspot.com/

11/19/2005 3:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"At heart, proponents of intelligent design are not motivated to improve science but to transform it into a theistic enterprise that supports religious faith."

don't we have enough of this in Utah already???

11/23/2005 3:27 PM  
Anonymous Kathrine Klauzar said...

To reply to the bill itself as well as every comment made concerning this topic on this site, I must say that I completely 100% endorse this bill. Science is composed of few laws and several theories. While a theory is supported by conclusive evidence, it is not a law. The definition of a scientific law is something that holds true in ALL circumstances. Since evolution has yet to achieve that status, we cannot, as rational people, hold to evolution with both hands and hope for the best. That is foolhardy. The concept of intelligent design, or the less politically correct term, God, has been around for centuries. God is the foundation of this nation. We show our trust in Him even on our monetary bills and coins. True science explores all aspects. Why not propose intelligent design? Are you afraid that it might become a scientific law? This curriculum would only help, not hinder, children. I support it completely and I call on responsible citizens throughout Utah to stand up and support a worthy cause.

1/04/2006 9:32 AM  
Anonymous I Love Science said...

As many posters have already noted, the ID movement is a thinly veiled attempt at introducing theology in the public school. Sen. Buttars, if people want their children taught creation, they can always teach them it at home or in church. ID fails to meet at least two requirements for being considered science.

1. It is not testable. We cannot prove or disprove it by making observations and performing experiments.

2. It calls upon a miracle to explain a phenomenon. If scientists cannot explain something through natural laws, then they don't explain it at all.

It's not that all scientists deny that miracles happen, it's just that when scientists accept that a miracle is the cause of a phenomenon, it tends to discourage them from trying to understand the phenomenon better.

Kathrine, there is a common misconception that because evolution is "only a theory." That it must not be well accepted in the scientific community. The controversy is not among scientists, but among the general public. Among scientists, the Theory of Evolution is about as controversial as the Theory of Plate Tectonics (theory that describes why continents move).

Ronald H. Matson, Ph.D. Describes the difference between a law and a theory: "Some scientists will tell you that the difference between them is that a law describes what nature does under certain conditions, and will predict what will happen as long as those conditions are met. A theory explains how nature works."
In other words, a law is what happens and a theory is why it happens that way. Note that the distinction has nothing to do with the level of proof. For more info please visit http://science.kennesaw.edu/~rmatson/3380theory.html

I am glad that people are seeing through this attempt to introduce religious dogma into science classrooms. Let's let the scientists decide what is or isn’t a science and not the senators.

Travis Gibby

11/14/2006 6:15 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

    Senate Site Feed

Home | Profiles | Archive | Links | Official Information | About | Contact | Government 2.0 Lab | Back to Top
© 2008. All rights reserved. Designed by Jeremy Wright & His Brother-In-Law