An initiative to introduce the teaching of Intelligent Design in
Michigan schools suffered a setback today. The state Congress
was supposed to issue new curriculum guidelines recently. In
September, the guidelines were delayed. Nobody knew for sure
how it would turn out. There was concern that Republican
legislators were trying to introduce ID content. As mentioned
the
href="http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060913/NEWS06/609130370/1008">The
Detroit Free Press:
Critics of the delayed vote, including a
representative from the
American Civil Liberties Union, said some Republican lawmakers are
trying to weaken state standards to allow some instruction about
intelligent design in science classes.
Intelligent design's
proponents hold that living organisms are so complex they must have
been created by a higher force rather than evolving from more primitive
forms. Some want science teachers to teach that Darwin's theory of
evolution is not a fact and has gaps.
Shelli Weisberg, ACLU of
Michigan legislative director, urged the state board to adopt the
science curriculum as recommended Tuesday, rather than grant the delay.
The Republican candidate for governor, Dick "
href="http://skepdic.com/amway.html">Pyramid"
DeVos, made headlines when he
href="http://markmaynard.com/index.php/2006/09/25/irrefutable_evidence_that_men_and_women">openly
href="http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2006/09/devos_and_intelligent_design.php">advocated
for the inclusion of ID content.
Now, Michigan lawmakers have gone ahead with the vote, and it turns out
that the final standards leave no room for ID. Again, from
the
href="http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061010/NEWS99/61010029">Free
Press:
The State Board of Education on Tuesday approved
public school curriculum guidelines that support the teaching of
evolution in science classes — but not intelligent design.
Intelligent design instruction could be left for other classes in
Michigan schools. But it shouldn’t have a home in science
class, based on the unanimously adopted guidelines.
One wonders what was truly behind the delay. Did they need
more time to assess the political implications? Did the
people of Michigan make it clear that they would no support lawmakers
who voted for lousy education? Were legislators afraid to
galvanize voters, possibly increasing turnout of progressives and
intellectuals? Whatever the case, it is a small victory.