BIBLE AND SCIENCE.

Hawera Star, Volume XLV, 24 July 1925, Page 5

BIBLE AND SCIENCE.

ANOTHER EVOLUTION CASE,

TO TEST RESTRICTIVE CLAUSE.

BY OABLE—PRESS ASSOCIATION —COPY HIGH! WASHINGTON, July 22.

A test suit to restrain the authorities teaching evolution and other sciences in public*schools in the District of Columbia has been filed by Lauren Wittner, Government- clerk. Th© suit involves all the unheard evidence in the Scopes trial, and seeks to prevent the payment of teachers’ salaries under a clause of the Appropriation Bill passed by Congress, stating that no part of the funds should be used to teach disrespect for the Bible.

The petition contends that biology denies the Biblical story of th e origin of man, and teaches the disintegration of organic bodies after death, whereas the Bible says all men will rise on the judgment day. It also refutes the Biblical statement that man is a perfect physical image of God. It alleges that chemistry teaches that one elemental matter cannot be changed into another, whereas the Bible says Christ made nine from water, God made man from th© dust of the earth, and turned Lot’s wife into a pillar of salt. it alleges that physics teaches that a rainbow is a natural reflection of light rays on the water in the clouds, whereas the Bible states that God made the rainbow as a promise to Noah that no flood would again kill all life. It alleges that astronomy shows that the sun is the centre of the solar system, around which the earth revolves, whereas the Bible states that tli e earth is the centre of the universe, that the earth was created four days before the sun, and that the sun, moon and stars travel round the earth.

It alleges that philology shows that language and speech are a gradual outgrowth of thought, whereas th e Bible teaches that the earth had one language until God confounded man’s speech in the Tower of Babel. Wittner brought the suit as a taxpayer of the District. He said: “I am on the side of science. I hav e filed the suit to determine what Congress really meant bv the restrictive clause.”

The suit was brought under the provisions of the District of Columbia Appropriation Bill, providing that no salary shall be paid any superintendent- who permits, or any teacher who teaches, disrespect of the Bible. Wittner asserts that the teachings of approved text books taken literally conflict with Scriptural text.