[longshadow]

I will stipulate that I will cherish the day when government gets out the education business if you will stop trying to hijack Creation/Evolution threads for your agenda to privatize education.

Fair enough?

Your "Wally One-note" act is wearing thin, and as an experienced Libertarian apparachik I'm telling you you aren't making any friends or influencing anyone in a positive way with your off-topic rants thrust into CREVO threads.

If you want to express your views on this topic, do so on the Education threads, not science threads. That's the appropriate place to fight your battle. You are undermining your stated goal by laborious off-topic posting, that is irritating to both sides of the CREVO debate, even those of us who are intellectually predisposed to support smaller, less intrusive government.

[wintertime]

if you will stop trying to hijack Creation/Evolution threads for your agenda to privatize education.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

longshadow,

The following is from the lead post. Please notice that it is ENTIRELY devoted to evolution in the schools. It takes up fully 1/2 of the original thread, therefore, discussing evolution as it applies to government schools is NOT "hijacking" the thread.

From the lead post:

"The "partisan takeover" of the title refers to the embrace of antievolutionism by what the article describes as "the right-wing fundamentalist faction of the Republican Party," noting, "In the 1990s, the state Republican platforms in Alaska, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oregon, Missouri, and Texas all included demands for teaching creation science." NCSE is currently aware of eight state Republican parties that have antievolutionism embedded in their official platforms or policies: those of Alaska, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Texas. Four of them -- those of Alaska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Texas -- call for teaching forms of creationism in addition to evolution; the remaining three call only for referring the decision whether to teach such "alternatives" to local school districts.


A sidebar to the article, entitled "Evolution under Attack," discusses the role of NCSE and its executive director Eugenie C. Scott in defending the teaching of evolution. Scott explained the current spate of antievolution activity as due in part to the rise of state science standards: "for the first time in many states, school districts are faced with the prospect of needing to teach evolution. ... If you don't want evolution to be taught, you need to attack the standards." Commenting on the decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover [Kitzmiller et al. v Dover Area School District et al.], Scott told PLoS Biology, "Intelligent design may be dead as a legal strategy but that does not mean it is dead as a popular social movement," urging and educators to continue to resist to the onslaught of the antievolution movement. "It's got legs," she quipped. "It will evolve."