Policymakers don't see eye-to-eye on a controversial bill that proposes to regulate classroom discussion on the origins of life, but their differences reach even beyond philosophy, faith and science.

It seems there are several interpretations of what SB96 would actually do.

Does it require teachers to read a disclaimer before applying Darwin's theory of evolution to humans? Does it codify what's already going on? Or does it open the door for something else to come?

It depends on whom you ask.

Sen. Chris Buttars, R-West Jordan and sponsor of SB96, in a Senate debate Friday made clear he didn't intend to inject religion into the public schools. He just wants to require teachers not to let theories of evolution overreach into the origins of life.

"Don't overstep. Don't overspeak. You can talk evolution. But when you get done, you have to express there are opposing viewpoints and there is not consensus."

SB96 states: "In order to encourage students to critically analyze theories regarding the origins of life or the origins or present state of the human race, consider opposing scientific viewpoints, and form their own opinions, the Legislature desires to avoid the perception that all scientists agree on any one theory or that the state endorses one theory over another."

Under the bill, the State Board of Education would have to establish curriculum requirements consistent with that statement.

Utah Eagle Forum President Gayle Ruzicka envisions the bill as giving "teachers permission to say there are opposing views within the scientific community about the origins of life.

"That's all they can say."

The bill follows Buttars' unsuccessful attempts last August to get the State Board of Education to assert that humans didn't evolve from any other species. He also suggested last summer that if students were learning human evolution, they be required to learn about intelligent design — the idea that life is too complex to be explained by Darwin's theory alone. He proposed the information could be dispensed in a humanities or other class outside of science.

The board responded by unanimously supporting high school evolution lessons and telling teachers to be respectful of students' beliefs.

Darwin's theory of evolution is central to the high school biology core curriculum.

The origin of life, however, is not a part of it.

"The theory of evolution, that is a generally accepted theory," said Larry Madden, president of the Utah Science Teachers Association. But when it comes to life's origins, he said, "there are no generally accepted theories."

So if teachers aren't required to even be talking about origins of life, why is a bill needed?