# Evolution Theory **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 11, 2003, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518 "2003-05-11T17:37:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/41 "2003-05-12T00:36:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Gary T \* > Let’s put it this way: what evidence can **you** put forward that said laws **were** derived from religious law? The fact that a several-thousand-year tradition of religious law said, for example, that murder is proscribed. It strains credulity to argue that US law to the same effect was uninfluenced by this. (Now it’s your turn.) ---
**Author:** ![Apollyon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/apollyon/32/4238_2.png) [@Apollyon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apollyon)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/42 "2003-05-12T00:40:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tomndebb \* > **To teach evolution with a spin of Intelligent Design, would be irresponsible–since the science is wrong…** Does teaching evolution with ID spin mean rather more than simply saying that evolution is the process and there may or may not be someone/ something that kicked off the process in the first place? I’m not familiar with the new ID – when I was doing anthro back in the 80’s “creation science” was still the major opponent of evolution – but why would the basic “concept” of ID be anything less than compatible with evolution? Certainly the idea of theistic evolution is popular in my country (30% of population or so, IIRC). For example, my father-in-law is a Methodist minister and a firm believer in / supporter of evolution. He’s very comfortable with the idea that the universe is umpteen billions of years old, that evolution is the process that has led to us, and that god set the whole thing off in the first place. Me, I’m agnostic, but his views seem to keep science and religion to their logical corners – science answers the hows, whens and wheres and religon address the why. I’d agree that open questions of an original process kicker-off-er aren’t science and may have no place in bio, but how does it make the science wrong? ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/43 "2003-05-12T00:40:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Q.E.D. \* > Individuals teaching in a public school are essentially agents of the government, and are, in fact, state employees, and therefore bound by the Constitution. Another interesting assertion. When they fail in this duty, with the violation of what law(s) are they charged? When was the last time that a public school teacher was charged with violating a provision of the US Constitution? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/44 "2003-05-12T00:44:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Xema \* > \*\*The fact that a several-thousand-year tradition of religious law said, for example, that murder is proscribed. It strains credulity to argue that US law to the same effect was uninfluenced by this. > > (Now it’s your turn.) \*\* Proscriptions against murder are not dependent on any religious belief, creationism _is_. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/45 "2003-05-12T00:44:55Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > The fact that they were _forbidden_ by the US Constitution to pass religiously derived laws. Quote the part of the US Constitution that you feel prohibits religiously derived laws. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_T](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Gary\_T](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_T)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/46 "2003-05-12T00:53:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Xema \* > \*\*…a several-thousand-year tradition of religious law said, for example, that murder is proscribed. It strains credulity to argue that US law to the same effect was uninfluenced by this. \*\* Doesn’t strain me a bit. If I wanted to establish a totally atheist state, I still wouldn’t want it to be legal for folks to go around killing others at will. The inclusion or absence of this (or any other) prohibition in religious teachings would have absolutely no bearing on the laws of said state. In fact, I think a better argument can be made that the human sense of self-preservation and related censure of murder predates human religious awareness. So both religious law and secular law (at least on this topic) derive from human nature, rather than either deriving from the other. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/47 "2003-05-12T00:55:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Xema \* > \*\*Quote the part of the US Constitution that you feel prohibits religiously derived laws. \*\* > [@](#): > > Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances . ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/48 "2003-05-12T00:57:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Xema \* > \*\*Another interesting assertion. When they fail in this duty, with the violation of what law(s) are they charged? When was the last time that a public school teacher was charged with violating a provision of the US Constitution? \*\* In [1998](http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/buried.htm): > [@](#): > > June 16 1998 > > New York (Reuters) – A New York City schoolteacher has been fired for praying and practicing religion in an elementary school classroom, officials said Tuesday. > > Mildred Rosario, who says she is a a born-again Christian, prayed with her sixth-grade class and told them about “Jesus, our Savior,” a Board of Education spokesman said. > > The parent of one of Rosario’s students complained to the board, and she was fired last Friday after a hearing. > > “ **She was fired because she was found to be in violation of the U.S. Constitution** ,” board spokesman David Galarza said on Tuesday. Bolding mine. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/49 "2003-05-12T01:00:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > Proscriptions against murder are not dependent on any religious belief Is the codification of this in religious belief over thousands of years is just an irrelevant coincidence? Those who drew up US laws on murder were uninfluenced by this – they invented the concept of murder as crime independently? ---
**Author:** ![Flying\_Monk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/48db29/32.png) [@Flying\_Monk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flying_Monk)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/50 "2003-05-12T01:01:32Z")
“No new laws are necessary, there is no possible violation of so-called separation of church and state, since no religious teaching is involved.” This sounds like complete nonsense. Obviously, religious teaching IS involved. “… teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of mankind to school children might be done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction.” Creationism, of course, is NOT scientific. It is religion, and therefore I believe it IS technically illegal, although with the Bush administration in charge this is likely to change, one way or another. Creationism IS taught in schools today, though only a few “hick” schools, though I think the official title is “Intelligent Design” - religion lightly disguised as science. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/51 "2003-05-12T01:07:14Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Xema \* > \*\*Is the codification of this in religious belief over thousands of years is just an irrelevant coincidence? Those who drew up US laws on murder were uninfluenced by this – they invented the concept of murder as crime independently? \*\* Yes. ---
**Author:** ![Darwins\_Finch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darwins_finch/32/20304_2.png) [@Darwins\_Finch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darwins_Finch)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/52 "2003-05-12T01:09:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Apollyon \* > **Does teaching evolution with ID spin mean rather more than simply saying that evolution is the process and there may or may not be someone/ something that kicked off the process in the first place?** ID addresses more than simply “the beginning” - it posits that specific molecules or biological structures were hand-crafted, so to speak, by a designer. This because those structures, it is claimed, could not have arisen by natural processes. Thus, it requires active intervention, rather than simply getting the ball rolling. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/53 "2003-05-12T01:12:24Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Gary T \* > Doesn’t strain me a bit. If I wanted to establish a totally atheist state, I still wouldn’t want it to be legal for folks to go around killing others at will. The inclusion or absence of this (or any other) prohibition in religious teachings would have absolutely no bearing on the laws of said state. So your state would reject any notion of connection between its ideas and very similar human ideas of very long standing that precede it? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/54 "2003-05-12T01:17:43Z")
**Xema** , it’s really just this simple: “Murder is illegal.” is a statement of fact. “God created the Earth.” is a statement of faith. It is illegal for a public school assert faith as fact. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/55 "2003-05-12T01:17:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof And this part of the Constitution, which says that it prohibits the establishment of religion (meaning the endorsement of an official state religion) you take to also mean the prohibition of any religiously derived law? ---
**Author:** ![Darwins\_Finch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darwins_finch/32/20304_2.png) [@Darwins\_Finch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darwins_Finch)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/56 "2003-05-12T01:18:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Xema \* > \*\*Is the codification of this in religious belief over thousands of years is just an irrelevant coincidence? Those who drew up US laws on murder were uninfluenced by this – they invented the concept of murder as crime independently? \*\* What, exactly, is the relevance of this “murder” debate to the OP? If you wish to debate whether the teaching of creation in public schools is allowed by the Consititution, that’s one thing. This is quite another. This is but a tangent of a tangent, and would probably be better served in Great Debates. Which is probably where this thread is likely to get tossed anyway… ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_T](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Gary\_T](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_T)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/57 "2003-05-12T01:19:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Xema \* > \*\*…uninfluenced by [religious belief] – they invented the concept of murder as crime independently? \*\* It wasn’t a matter of inventing the concept of murder as crime. I can assure you that folks with no religious belief or education still do not like the idea of their family, friends, or selves being killed. The fact that religious codes deal with the same concept doesn’t mean that those codes are necessarily the basis for criminal law. There are any number of religious tenets that are not reflected in secular laws, and any number of laws that clearly have no relationship whatever to religion. I don’t see any support for the notion that if law and religion happen to agree, there must be an influence or relationship. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/58 "2003-05-12T01:19:57Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Xema \* > \*\*So your state would reject any notion of connection between its ideas and very similar human ideas of very long standing that precede it? \*\* That’s the very nature of a secular state. If every religion on Earth espoused murder as a good way to solve problems, I’d still expect a secular government to prohibit it. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/59 "2003-05-12T01:21:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Xema \* > \*\*And this part of the Constitution, which says that it prohibits the establishment of religion (meaning the endorsement of an official state religion) you take to also mean the prohibition of any religiously derived law? \*\* It’s not just “how I take it,” it is, in fact, what it means. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518/60 "2003-05-12T01:22:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Q.E.D. \* > “She was fired because she was found to be in violation of the U.S. Constitution,” board spokesman David Galarza said on Tuesday. Yet you supply no evidence of her being charged with any crime, which means your post did not respond to mine. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evolution-theory/174518.md?page=4)