So here's the facts guys, whether you like 'em or not. 99.9% of biologists consider evolution to be the bed-rock of biology. The basic principles are even being applied to other fields, like economics, in which self-organizing systems are an important area of study. (You guys are conservatives, right? You do believe in self-organizing economies instead of command-and-control ones?)
But you guys think some double-talking pseudo-scientists should get equal time in science classrooms. Hey, it's your call to support such silliness. But I'm telling you - as Arnold would say "This does not help our mission". It just brands you to the rest of the world as kooks, including to many conservatives and co-religionists.
We've got a lot on our plate. A federal welfare state that must be fixed or it's going to doom our kids to poverty. A large population of religious fanatics anxious to blow us all up in exchange for 72 virgins. But you want to spend your time promoting something that even your allies don't believe.
Look, we've got an educational system that can't even teach basic math and English. And you're worried about whether Sunday School stories get told in science class. Sorry, but I consider your priorities clearly out of whack.
Now, you can go ahead and sputter all you like from this point. I long ago learned not to argue with people about their faith. But I still think you ought to rethink your priorities, even if you'll never agree about evolution.
While I don't believe that creationism should be taught in schools, why is there such a need to teach evolution at all?
We can study extinct species without saying "this species begat this one". The jury is still out. Scientists in different nations cannot agree on where man originated or how he came to populate different continents. There may have been some foot travel but there may also have been some boat voyages.
You are right that there are a lot of other things to teach children. So teach them those things that are known rather than those things that are suspected.
Is much time spent on the big bang theory in elementary and high schools?
How about man made global warming which is also a "scientifically" supported theory in some minds?
Nice post- they say I'm a Troll cause im new to FR and live by science, but you said it all brother.
You CAN be a conservative and still understand the scientific method.
You cant just pick and choose which parts of objective reality appeal to your politics- talk about relativism !
Show me any evidence against evolution derived from the scientific method, and I'll gladly agree that it did not happen.
Here come the cranks !
"Look, we've got an educational system that can't even teach basic math and English. And you're worried about whether Sunday School stories get told in science class. Sorry, but I consider your priorities clearly out of whack."
As always any post involving evoltution eventually descends into what is or is not true.
What is an empirical fact is that this judge found an establishment clause violation based on his opinion that the sticker may create an impression of religious advocation. Whether one does or does not believe in the THEORY of evolution on a MACRO level is immaterial here. The question is whether the judge could assert any religious references in the sticker's language. He could not and did not. It is, under the legal question, irrelevant whether any creationist or intelligent design proponents supported the sticker's inclusion.
My opinion is that this is an attempt to create a precedent that allows a judge to apply impressions of a statute, act, sticker etc. as a bonafide rationale to invoke the establishment clause. This is the same type of judge that helped create rulings that have legitimized and enhanced hate crime/sexual harrassment/racial intimidation laws that have the lowered threshhold of "impression."
Your feeling that this is nit picking because all of the other failures of the educational system strikes me as being completely blind to the dangers that such rulings have and will create.
This judge's ruling is Orwellian to the core.
Are you Canadian?
Hey Joe... Excellent point. I totally agree. Every time I hear Rush talk about evolution, I cringe. He should stick with politics.
Excellent post. You hit the nail on the head. Too many people here equate conservatism with Christianity. There are many areas of overlap, but science isn't one of them. Creationists will drag down the entire conservative movement if given the chance.