Evolution in 1987, the Supreme

¶ … Evolution

In 1987, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Edwards v. Aquillard. That case was seminal in its importance to the idea of the teaching of Evolutionary theory in the public schools. Since the 1920s, the U.S. Education System has wavered regarding the teaching of creationism vs. evolution in the public schools. In the 1960s, new scientific and teaching standards fueled the debate. Many conservative states attempted to force through legislation that would require the teaching of creationism along with Darwinian evolution. In the early 1980s, a Louisiana law, titled the "Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science in Public School Instruction Act" prohibited teaching evolution unless it was accompanied by a balanced approach in teaching creationism. This essentially forced schools to teach a Biblical belief that life arose abruptly according to Genesis if the school wished to integrate evolution into the classroom.

Louisiana Governor Edwards argued that it did not force the teaching of creationism, but simply required that if evolution was taught, creationism should be taught as well, forming a balanced curriculum. In support of Aquillard, 72 Nobel scientists, 17 state academies of science, and 7 other scientific organizations filed amicus briefs positing that evolution was a scientific theory while creationism a non-scientific explanation based on faith. The Aquillard side did not demean of underhandedly critique the teaching of creationism, but remained convinced that teaching a Biblical theory violated the Constitutional separation of Church and State.

In a 7 to 2 vote the Court ruled against Louisiana and held that the State law did indeed violate the Constitution. Using the Lemon test, the court argued that Louisiana's law failed on all points of the law: First, it was not enacted to test secular purpose. Second, the primary effect of State law was to advance a viewpoint that an advanced being created the universe and it was a series of chemical reactions that occurred to stir life, amid a process of slow change over time to allow species to develop. Further, the Court found that despite the verbiage, the Louisiana law did not protect academic freedom, but in turn required religious beliefs to be introduced into the classroom since modern biology relies on learning evolution as a concept. Dissenting Judges Scalia and Rehnquist wrote that students should be allowed to make up their own minds about topics such as this. This case had a great effect on the American creationist movement, who now sought to redefine and package its views as "Creation Science," even though there is no science involved. It also contributed to an upsurge in the antipathy between evolutionists and creationists in the modern educational and scholarly fields.

The Argument- The theory of evolution was developed out of the work of 19th century botanist and explorer, Charles Darwin and his book On the Origin of Species. Essentially, it is a scientific theory that postulates that organisms change over time based on pressures from the environment that cause genetic mutations within the organism. Over time, these changes are more adapted to a specific environment, more of that organism live longer and reproduce more, thus causing those traits to become even more entrenched in the population. Life then, is part of a gigantic tree in which primitive organisms, over millions and millions of years, evolved into higher beings due to the product of two opposing forces: variation in traits (common or rare) and natural selection (which traits aid survival) (Understanding Evolution).

Creation Science is a branch of creationism that has resurfaced in American education after several Supreme Court decisions defined what could and could not be taught in the public schools. Because religion cannot be taught except as a philosophical concept, conservatives now title their literal belief in the Bible's explanation of the origin of humans -- creation science. Creation science follows the literal view of the Biblical book Genesis as an interpretation of the complex events required by a creator to form life. They argue that life is far too complex to exist without a designer -- something as precise as an eye could not have evolved from amoebae. Creation science also disputes the geological age of the earth, the process of slow change over time due to adaptation, and the concept of mutations improving some species over time (Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences).