With both sides of the Intelligent Design Trial in Dover PA willing to fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, I’m concerned about nominee Harriet Miers’ ability to separate her personal religious views from her duties to the Constitution.
So I went to www.AskHarrietMiers.com and submitted the following question. To clarify, that is not a site where the questions will automatically be passed on to Ms. Miers. Rather, it is a site of an influential interest group, the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, which will be in a position to ask Ms. Miers critical questions.
Here’s what I submitted:
“The central argument about teaching Intelligent Design (ID) in science classes has two components: (1) Is ID science, i.e., does it belong in that curricular area? (2) Does ID’s reliance on a supernatural designer — supernatural because the designer sets nature’s course — make it inherently religious even without an explicit mention of a deity? What legal, historical, scientific, ethical, and philosophical principles would guide you in dealing with these two issues?”
I’m sure there are other places where scientists will have opportunities to contribute to the discourse relating to Ms. Miers’ confirmation hearings. I urge my readers to get involved!
For my personal views, written for the youngsters who read my books, go to my “Ask Dr. Fred” question about a scientist’s view of creation.
ScienceBlog.com has no paywalls, no sponsored content, and no agenda beyond getting the science right. Every story here is written to inform, not to impress an advertiser or push a point of view.
Good science journalism takes time — reading the papers, checking the claims, finding researchers who can put findings in context. We do that work because we think it matters.
If you find this site useful, consider supporting it with a donation. Even a few dollars a month helps keep the coverage independent and free for everyone.