Posted on 12/11/2002 6:28:08 AM PST by A2J
By WILL SENTELL
wsentell@theadvocate.com
Capitol news bureau
High school biology textbooks would include a disclaimer that evolution is only a theory under a change approved Tuesday by a committee of the state's top school board.
If the disclaimer wins final approval, it would apparently make Louisiana just the second state in the nation with such a provision. The other is Alabama, which is the model for the disclaimer backers want in Louisiana.
Alabama approved its policy six or seven years ago after extensive controversy that included questions over the religious overtones of the issue.
The change approved Tuesday requires Louisiana education officials to check on details for getting publishers to add the disclaimer to biology textbooks.
It won approval in the board's Student and School Standards/ Instruction Committee after a sometimes contentious session.
"I don't believe I evolved from some primate," said Jim Stafford, a board member from Monroe. Stafford said evolution should be offered as a theory, not fact.
Whether the proposal will win approval by the full state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education on Thursday is unclear.
Paul Pastorek of New Orleans, president of the board, said he will oppose the addition.
"I am not prepared to go back to the Dark Ages," Pastorek said.
"I don't think state boards should dictate editorial content of school textbooks," he said. "We shouldn't be involved with that."
Donna Contois of Metairie, chairwoman of the committee that approved the change, said afterward she could not say whether it will win approval by the full board.
The disclaimer under consideration says the theory of evolution "still leaves many unanswered questions about the origin of life.
"Study hard and keep an open mind," it says. "Someday you may contribute to the theories of how living things appeared on earth."
Backers say the addition would be inserted in the front of biology textbooks used by students in grades 9-12, possibly next fall.
The issue surfaced when a committee of the board prepared to approve dozens of textbooks used by both public and nonpublic schools. The list was recommended by a separate panel that reviews textbooks every seven years.
A handful of citizens, one armed with a copy of Charles Darwin's "Origin of the Species," complained that biology textbooks used now are one-sided in promoting evolution uncritically and are riddled with factual errors.
"If we give them all the facts to make up their mind, we have educated them," Darrell White of Baton Rouge said of students. "Otherwise we have indoctrinated them."
Darwin wrote that individuals with certain characteristics enjoy an edge over their peers and life forms developed gradually millions of years ago.
Backers bristled at suggestions that they favor the teaching of creationism, which says that life began about 6,000 years ago in a process described in the Bible's Book of Genesis.
White said he is the father of seven children, including a 10th-grader at a public high school in Baton Rouge.
He said he reviewed 21 science textbooks for use by middle and high school students. White called Darwin's book "racist and sexist" and said students are entitled to know more about controversy that swirls around the theory.
"If nothing else, put a disclaimer in the front of the textbooks," White said.
John Oller Jr., a professor at the University of Louisiana-Lafayette, also criticized the accuracy of science textbooks under review. Oller said he was appearing on behalf of the Louisiana Family Forum, a Christian lobbying group.
Oller said the state should force publishers to offer alternatives, correct mistakes in textbooks and fill in gaps in science teachings. "We are talking about major falsehoods that should be addressed," he said.
Linda Johnson of Plaquemine, a member of the board, said she supports the change. Johnson said the new message of evolution "will encourage students to go after the facts."
why should someone question the assumptions of his culture?
Welcome aboard. Another fan of Behe and Dembski come out of hiding. :-)
Glad to hear that Behe and Dembski are agnostics. It raises my opinion of them. ;^)
And undirected abiogenesis :-)
Which no so laughably was taught as fact in my high school.
There is great virtue in asking questions. Nothing wrong wtih it. Alexander Solzhenitsyn did it. If you don't ask, how would you realize that your society may be based on a lie? And if you question the fundamental assumption, and then learn that your society is based on a lie, why wouldn't you reject it?
No, but Behe and Dembski are certainly questioning the status quo. You're not suggesting that one must be agnostic to be question assumptions?
An interesting question. If one should find that our rights are not God-given, does one reject America? That's a conclusion a lot of young American socialist reached. One must always remember that just because someone says something is a lie, doesn't make it so.
Are you saying asking questions is an end?
Certainly.
A bit of rhetorical over-reach there. Our individual rights (life, liberty & property) are just fine, whether they come from God, from trial-and-error, or from the Great Pumpkin. The only problem in this country is that we too often see the government violating those rights.
I was sloppy with that "it." I meant the assumption, not the country.
OK, if you question the fundamental assumption, and then learn that your society is based on a lie, why wouldn't you reject it?
Yeah...please do -- try !
March (( publish )) or die !
But why do they question it?
Because they see things in the status quo that don't add up.
Countries founded on the principal that rights came from God have included all of Europe during the millennia of "divine right of kings."
So you see, rights granted by god have been used to justify individual rights and to take them away.
If I learned with certainty (which I haven't) that our rights do not come from God, I would reject the assumption that God is the source of our rights. So I would end up with rights with a secular source. I would not reject the idea of individual rights, nor would I reject the country which is based on those rights.
Because they see things in the status quo that don't add up.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.