Posted on 09/30/2005 8:31:26 AM PDT by Right Wing Professor
HARRISBURG — When he painted a mural depicting the ascent of man, Zach Strausbaugh had no idea that evolution was a controversial topic.
"At the time, I really didn't give it a second thought," he said. "I believe in fact, and there are so many facts that support evolution."
For his graduation requirement at Dover Area High School, the then-senior spent almost a semester working on the detailed 4-foot-by-16-foot painting of man evolving from his apelike ancestors. In 1998, he donated the work to his science department.
But Strausbaugh was more of an art student than a science major. So when the now 25-year-old design engineer learned that Larry Reeser, the high school janitor at the time, burned his artwork two years ago because it offended him, well, he was a little disappointed.
"I think it's kind of ignorant," said Strausbaugh, who lives in Dover. "Even if he didn't believe in it, it wasn't nice to destroy someone else's work."
But in testimony Thursday in the fourth day of the Dover school district's federal trial over intelligent design, board members Bill Buckingham and Alan Bonsell were said to have defended the burning of Strausbaugh's painting. The testimony came in U.S. Middle District Court as the plaintiffs' attorneys were trying to show that board members had religious motivation when they approved intelligent design as a "balance" to the theory of evolution in the biology curriculum.
Former school board member Carol "Casey" Brown said Reeser destroyed the work because he thought it was full of lies, it offended his faith and he didn't want his granddaughter exposed to the graphic nature of the painting, something he considered to be "an obscenity."
Brown said Buckingham later told her that what Reeser did was right and the district should not be accepting such donations of artwork.
Brown's husband, Jeff, also a former board member, recalled that in 2003, Bonsell also said he was offended by the mural.
"I remember him snorting through his nostrils," Jeff Brown testified Thursday. "And saying something about kids shouldn't be exposed to this sort of thing."
Reeser said Thursday night he agreed with Casey Brown's characterization of why he burned the mural.
"Did you see the monkey's genitals hanging out?" Reeser asked. "How would you like your granddaughter to sit next to that?"
Casey Brown said she had been told Reeser had been reprimanded "and subsequently retired," but the 67-year-old said he had not been punished in any way.
The Browns were the day's primary witnesses. The husband and wife served on the school board together but quit in protest after a majority of the board voted in October to change the biology curriculum to include intelligent design.
After Casey Brown submitted her resignation, she testified that both Bonsell and Buckingham questioned her belief in God. She said Buckingham called her an atheist that night and accused her and her husband of destroying the school board.
Months later, board member Alan Bonsell also questioned her faith, Casey Brown testified. "He told me I would be going to hell," Brown said.
Bonsell denied making that remark. "That's an outright lie," he said. "I never said anything like that — anything like that."
While the Browns both testified that board members consistently ignored established district policies to push through the revised biology curriculum, they also admitted that at times they played a role in the changes.
Jeff Brown said he was the first one to actually use the phrase "intelligent design" at a June meeting in an effort to steer the debate from creationism.
However, in January depositions, Bill Buckingham said he first heard it mentioned by Bonsell in 2003.
Brown also testified he was the one who proposed a motion at an Oct. 18 meeting to add "Note: Origins of Life will not be taught" to the biology curriculum change that includes intelligent design. But upon cross-examination, one of Dover's attorneys, Patrick Gillen, showed that it was actually Bonsell who proposed the addendum.
Additionally, when curriculum committee members issued a proposal to change the biology curriculum to point to "problems" of evolutionary theory, Casey Brown suggested changing the word "problems" to "gaps."
Biologist Ken Miller testified this week that the use of the word "gaps" is misleading to students.
Dover's lead attorney, Richard Thompson, said the Browns' participation shows that the board did follow a democratic process. He said the fact that Bonsell, who the defense has been presenting as the chief architect of the curriculum revision, was willing to propose the motion showed a willingness to compromise with teachers and other board members.
Plaintiffs will continue making their case today in a trial that is expected to continue for another five weeks.
Despite the daily headlines and television coverage, Strausbaugh has not been following the case closely. And even though he doesn't think intelligent design belongs in science class, he thinks the issue has been blown out of proportion.
"I can't believe our little town of Dover's making national news for something like this," he said.
If it offends you, burn it ping.
"Reeser destroyed the work because he thought it was full of lies, it offended his faith and he didn't want his granddaughter exposed to the graphic nature of the painting, something he considered to be "an obscenity."
Didn't the Taliban say something similar about the ancient statues they blew up in Afghanistan?
LOL - that picture always cracks me up. And what did the women look like as they "evolved"?
This ongoing debate is so ridiculous and I wish it would finally end. Personally, I don't see any reason for science and religion to be in opposition to each other. They have separate roles. Science does not, nor should not, address the existence of God or the way people should live. It addresses the physical world and the way it works. Whether religion should have a place in public schools is a valid question, but, IMO, science class is the last place it should be shoehorned into. Science IS NOT a threat to religion, people! The two things address different questions. Science answers 'how' and religion answers 'why'.
Actually, the "fringe" cult is pretty mainstream these days. And their dogma is the law of the land. (The recent court disputes are not about banning the teachnig of evolution; they are about allowing alternative views to be taught along with it.)
That said, burning the mural was a stupid and rude thing to do (unless it part of a clean-up / trash burning and was burned because it was old and junky, not to make some kind of statement.)
Good enough for me!
Oh, that's so scientific!
Longer hair, and a few more clothes, because they have, you know, b**bs.
Personally I believe the Bible's version: God made it all but any and every possible "evolution" within the "kind" could and may have happened. The idea that we can be both "in the image of God" and a chimp derivative is rediculous. Believe one or the other - not both.
That said, I agree that Creationism should NOT be taught in public schools as science. However, a teacher mentioning that Darwinism has flaws that some resolve with the idea of Intelligent Design is NOT an attack on science!
My boys learn about Darwin and his theories but also learn the story of Creation and how parts of Darwinism don't fit. Yep, my boys are home-schooled and aren't missing a thing in science.
"God will return and we will all know just how he created everything and how accurately "natural selection" fits into the picture He painted."
What reason do you have to believe this? Any evidence?
|
I'm printing that out on white refrigerator-magnet stuff, and putting it on my car.
I believe you can get the sticker at James Randi's site.
Thanks for the ping!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.