A State Fossil For S. Carolina Faces Mammoth Obstacle
The Columbian Mammoth is facing extinction as South Carolina's proposed state fossil unless the elephant-sized Ice Age mammal can survive the efforts of creationist lawmakers.
South Carolina is one of only 10 states that doesn't currently have an official state fossil, something an 8-year-old South Carolinian girl suggested the legislature remedy by adopting the Columbian Mammoth. The prehistoric pachyderm is a cousin of the better-known Woolly Mammoth (already Alaska's state fossil). The girl's rationale was that fossilized teeth of the tusked creature were discovered in a South Carolina swamp as far back as 1725.
But as the proposal was being debated last week, Republican state Sen. Kevin Bryant tried unsuccessfully to amend the bill to include a quotation from the book of Genesis about God's creation of the animal kingdom.
"I attempted to recognize the creator," Bryant writes on his website. "However, the amendment was ruled out of order."
In tossing the amendment, Bryant's fellow senators cited his introduction of "new and independent matter," to the bill.
Undaunted, Bryant has rewritten his amendment, proposed language that refers to the mammoth — which paleontologists believe was the product of millions of years of evolution before disappearing about 12,500 years ago — "as created on the sixth day with the beasts of the field."
"I think it's an appropriate time to acknowledge the creator," Bryant tells The Greenville News.
According to the newspaper:
"Bryant said he thinks his latest amendment will pass muster as a logical extension of the bill because, "Since we're dealing with the fossil of the woolly mammoth then this amendment would deal with the beginning of the woolly mammoth."
"The original version of the bill referred to the woolly mammoth, but it was later changed to honor the Columbian mammoth.
"'The courts have upheld using Old Testament scripture because it doesn't point to a single religion,' he said. 'If I used text from the New Testament, if somebody challenged it in court you might lose on those grounds.'"