Matters of science, culture, history and experience that naturally prompt fascination and wonder must be explained within the frame work of the biblical world view." You might think this quote came from the distant past when scientists were put on trial for heresy and imprisoned or burned at the stake. Well, think again. This quote is from the welcoming statement on a web page called Creationresource.org. It is relevant today because this is where you can find material which is being used to support a book challenge at the Smith School Library here in Helena.

The offending book in this case is Horse, by Juliette Clutton-Brock. Part of the Eyewitness series, this book provides information for nine to 12 year olds on all aspects of horses and ponies. There is a chapter in the book titled, How Horses Evolved. The person filing the complaint says that the book fails to properly present evolution as a religious belief.

Book challenges are nothing new in Helena. We have seen them before at both our local library and in the school system. And School District No. 1 has a good policy which allows parents and others to challenge material they find offensive while giving the community an opportunity to review and participate. But, it is also important to recognize that the challenge here in Helena is part of a much larger controversy which is boiling across the country.

A recent school controversy in Darby also focused on evolution. Following several community meetings, the Darby school board adopted a program called "Intelligent Design." This program promotes the idea that the world is simply too complex to have been created without an "intelligent designer" (God?). A group in the community wanted "Intelligent Design theory" presented in science classes along with "evolution theory." Of course Intelligent Design didn't just appear in Darby. It is promoted by a national group called the Discovery Institute. Despite repeated warnings about the legality the move, the Darby school board voted to adopt the Intelligent Design proposal. Maybe that is because two national religious right organizations, the Alliance Defense Fund and the Liberty Counsel, have volunteered to provide representation if needed. There is little doubt the Darby controversy will continue for months to come. And little doubt that numerous national organizations are looking for test cases to litigate.

So far, repeated efforts to have the biblical creation story treated as science in public school classrooms have been rejected by the courts as an unconstitutional state adoption of religious doctrine. The newest tactic of the creation science crowd seems to be to challenge "evolution theory" as an unproven belief system which constitutes a religion of its own. If evolution is a religious theory, then it should be prohibited just like creation science has been. In fact, the person challenging the book here in Helena says that evolution is a religious belief.

This strategy hinges on the use of the word "theory." Like many words, its meaning varies depending on usage and context. For example, we might say that we have a theory about why a person committed a crime. The meaning of the word in this context is that the theory is an idea or set of ideas which are not proven or even provable. On the other hand the word "theory" in the scientific context means a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena. Probability theory and Einstein's theory of relativity, are examples of the word being used in this way. Evolution theory fits in the second category. It is not simply conjecture about how certain events have occurred. It is supported by facts and a documented record. Yet those who want to see the biblical creation story taught as science play on the term "theory of evolution." They insist that evolution is nothing more than speculation.

As a community we must be very cautious about bending science to fit some people's religious perspectives. Religion belongs in our classrooms; it should be taught in philosophy, history, and a host of other disciplines. But it should not be used to undermine the science curriculum.

Ken Toole is the program director for The Montana Human Rights Network