What Part of "Science" Don't You Understand?

The Press-Citizen reported that more than 220 people, including 56 University of Iowa professors, have signed a faculty petition against House File 183 - The Evolution Academic Freedom Act, which was introduced this session by State Rep. Rod Roberts, R-Carroll. As you might imagine, Representative Roberts is not a scientist and, apparently, maybe not a very good lawmaker either. It does not come as a shock that he is, according to his biography "the Development Director with Christian Churches/Churches of Christ in Iowa."

Now if there is a desire to teach theological premises in schools, great--as an elective course, why not? A comparative religion course might actually be helpful to help young people to understand the beliefs of others and to better form their own beliefs. But to infuse a science curriculum with a discussion of a type of creationism that has no basis in science and must rely on faith is antithetical to the study of science.

In any case, churches are better suited to the teaching of their brand of religion and it is less confusing that way. There is a lot of good that comes from the teachings of Jesus Christ for instance, even without a basis in science. Treating people with dignity is a great idea whether it came from Christ, Mohamed, Confucius, or Pagans. So to Rep. Roberts, I say, respectfully, your beliefs and a need to produce students who have a mind for science need to be separated. People get enough mixed messages in our society.