Repeatedly, Sen. Chris Buttars has said that his legislation concerning the teaching of evolution in public schools is not an attempt to introduce religion into science classrooms.

Nevertheless, religion came up repeatedly during Senate debate of the bill Friday, with some lawmakers equating their support for the bill with opposition to the spread of secularism.

"I will not be cowed," said Sen. Allen Christensen, R-North Ogden, who said he hadn't been engaged on the evolution debate until opposition to Buttars' bill emerged. "I disagree with these theories being presented as totally accepted fact.

"It falls to us as lawmakers to ensure the truth is taught."

The bill directs the state Board of Education to establish curriculum on the origins of life and the origins of the human race, and mandates that the instruction cannot endorse any particular theory and must "stress that not all scientists agree" which theory is correct.

It passed its first hearing before the full Senate by a 17-12 vote and is likely to gain final approval from the Senate next week. After that it would head to the state House of Representatives.

Sen. Parley Hellewell, R-Orem, also expressed dismay at what he saw as a "slippery slope" of "secularism and atheism," which he said are religions.

"It seems like for a long time we've been quiet on this issue and just kind of allowed these things to happen. It's their religion that has been put forth," he said. "I think it's our responsibility as legislators to straighten these things out."

Four Republicans joined the Senate's eight Democrats in voting against the bill.

Sen. Lyle Hillyard, R-Logan, employed the "slippery slope" metaphor -- only he was worried about the Legislature becoming involved in every conflict over school curriculum that emerges.

"I don't think it's our role in the Legislature to micromanage the curriculum," he said, noting that the state Board of Education has elected members to direct that work.

And in a dramatic speech, Senate Majority Leader Peter Knudson, R-Brigham City, castigated Buttars for a statement that Knudson said implied a link between support for the bill and one's religious belief.

"That is not the spirit by which we should discuss this legislation," he said. "I don't have any doubt in my mind about the existence of God, nor do I have any doubt in my mind about the creation of Earth by God. The one thing that we do not know ... is how God created the Earth.

"It saddens me that one's faith would be challenged on a vote on this bill. I vote no."

The legislation makes a mishmash of scientific thinking and could unnecessarily introduce controversy to Utah classrooms, according to science advocates and education officials.

Buttars said his intent is to prevent public school instruction from overstating what has been scientifically established and mandating that the curriculum not endorse any particular scientific approach.

The problem, however, is that there aren't any valid opposing scientific viewpoints to evolution, said Susan Spath, public information project director for the National Center for Science Education.

She said the Buttars bill employs several tactics used by anti-evolutionists -- for example, using the word "theories" instead of "theory" to imply that there are scientific alternatives to evolution that are being suppressed.

There's also the use of the phrases "origins of life" and "origins of the human race" as stand-ins for the theory of evolution, which states only that organisms have changed over time and that the changes can be passed on to future generations.

"Legitimate scientists will typically say on the question of life from nonlife, billions of years ago -- the science there is very speculative," Spath said.

"But if we're talking about the origin of species, that's a different question," she said -- one that is "not arguable."

The waters are also muddied when critics take ongoing scientific discussions and use them to argue that evolution remains speculative.

"There are many open questions within evolution," Spath said. "How did it happenfi What are the mechanismsfi Are birds descended from dinosaursfi That's an exciting debate.

"Whether or not birds descended from creatures previously on the Earth is not a question."

State school Superintendent Patti Harrington, meanwhile, said she's worried that the legislation would force public schools to enter terrain that's avoided right now.

Public schools don't address subjects like the origins of life -- but Buttars' bill would require it, she said.

"We teach evolution. We teach evolution of species, and biological diversity," she said. "It's a major unifying concept in science."

Going beyond that would present an instructional problem, continued Harrington, in that the state would have to create instruction on material like the origins of life and origins of human beings -- and then have a disclaimer stating that there are competing theories.

"Any reasonable high school kid will say, 'Well, what are the other theoriesfi' " Harrington said. "Someone's going to have to help us out as to what they are.

"How this will play out is it will place the controversy that is going on in the Hill right now in every classroom."

This story appeared in The Daily Herald on page A1.