“It’s clear to me that many of our constituents believe that any discussion regarding changes

to the language in our science standards regarding evolution is an effort to place Intelligent

Design in our science classrooms. So, before we go on, I’d like to say something about the

Intelligent Design discussion. I think it’s important to take the time to do this, because I

believe we play out on a local level some of the very same things that seem to be happening on

the national level. And I believe this discussion is part of something much bigger than just a

difference in opinion on the wording of some science standards. I believe in the end we are

talking about protecting a basic freedom that our founding fathers so wisely preserved when

they set forth the rules governing our country so many years ago- freedom of religion. We’ve

meeting, many of them referencing much scientific research, and all but one, reflecting grave

concerns about the slightest bit of change in our standards lest we dilute our science program

and give impetus to what one writer described as a “ religiously motivated campaign to force

ID into Minnetonka science classrooms.” The letters came from Drs., Professors, parents,

and science professionals. One writer included information from the American Association of

University Professors, the National Academy of Sciences, the National Association of Biology

Teachers, the National Science Teacher’s Association, the American Academy for the

advancement of Sciences, and others.

We are all free to draw our own conclusions, but these seem to me to be very reliable and

complete sources of scientific information. And to me they all say the same thing; that I. D. is

not science, does not belong in a science classroom and that biological evolution, and here I

quote the American Academy for the Advancement of Sciences, “ is more than just a theory. It

is as factual an explanation of the universe as the atomic theory of matter or the germ theory

of disease. Our understanding of gravity is still a work in progress. But the phenomenon of

gravity, like evolution, is an accepted fact.”

There was one particularly interesting, if not disturbing piece of information that came our

way. It’s from an article titled, “ Intelligent Design: The New Creationism Threatens All of

Science and Society, by Marshall Berman, 1995-2005, American Physical Society. The article

includes information about the Discovery Institute’s Center for the Renewal of Science and

Culture and their goals. One of the twenty-year goals is to “see design theory permeate our

religious, cultural, moral and political life”.

Another paragraph reads as follows:

“John Mark Reynolds is a CSC fellow on the faculty at Biola University (listed by Access

Research Network as an ID college,www.arn.org/college.htm). He writes, “Torrey Honors

Institute (at Biola) is at war with the modern culture. Torrey does not want to ‘get along with

materialism, secularism, naturalism, post-modernism, radical feminism, or spiritualism. We

want to win over every facet of the culture, from the arts to the sciences, for the Kingdom of

Christ.” ( Reynolds, J. M. undated). The real goals of the modern ID movement are evident.

Their target is all of science and society: evolution is just the beginning, the edge of the

“Wedge.”

It would appear the promotion of I. D. is not about science at all-but rather about the

promotion of a worldview that would impose upon us all the religious beliefs of a select few.

This is the bigger part I mentioned earlier. It seems we are engaged in a battle for our

religious freedoms all over again.

I am in favor of approving our Minnetonka science standards as they are presented to us this

evening by our own panel of science experts, and it’s clear our constituents are in favor of

these standards as well. Therefore, I urge my fellow board members to approve our standards

as presented. Thank you.”