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."
Ha! It may look that way, but the argument does not run in both directions. I am fully ready to admit that not all evolutionists are communists. The reverse, however, is as good as ubiquitous, namely that communists by nature adopt the tenets of evolutionism and atheism.
When Marx went to correspond with Darwin it wasn't out of likemindedness with respect to gravitational theory, was it? I mean, what on earth do you think Marx found so attractive in Darwin? His beard?
That would be a wise thing to do, as NONE of the evolutionists posting to these threads is a Stalinist Communist.
He's right. I know a guy that joined the Communist Club in the mall. He had to swear an oath that he believed in the scientific theory of evolution. They said it just like Fester says too, that it is a "natural adoption". So he did. Then he gave them $50 and got a cool sticker that says:
"Communism is Cool - Evolution is Evo-rrific!"
Oy! Think of the irony here...an atheist instructing a Christian on the finer points of HIS own theology.
Jesus and His disciples lived communally. Judas held the purse for the group. Judas betrayed Jesus for a number of reasons, not the least of which was GREED. Jesus had to be betrayed so He could die for the sins of humanity. Jesus died at the hands of Rome, the Sanhedron and the Pharisees...none of which were communistic entities.
I always loved that part of "The Last Temptation of Christ". Judas not wanting to sacrifice Jesus... Jesus all but forcing him to do it.... Just a great spin on the necessity of Jesus dying. What a story.
I was hoping you would engage more diligently in addressing other possibilities as to how to explain existence in general. I honestly cannot think of any alternatives than "accident or design." Your proposal, "the multitude of those held by your neighbors" doesn't cut it. In fact it violates your own directive to me concerning "staying on point."
"Again, you avoid the point to argue about word meanings"
You're the one who "made the point" that our forefathers left "god" out of the picture, right? Why do you accuse me of avoiding the point when I state that our forefathers made many references to God in their writings?
If arguments about "word meanings" are problem for you, then what are you even doing in this forum?
"Enjoy your games and dreams that -- "Very few people ever controvert my posts."
I very much enjoy addressing the controverting remarks - many of them well-reasoned and well-presented - from those who hold opposite views. That includes yourself. I hope you will remain engaged in the debate as you have time and opportunity. Indeed, it would be mighty dull around here if my posts remained uncontroverted.
You may think it to be rhetorical for me to bring this up. I don't know. But this would be an axample of an ancient writing corroborating a scientific fact that is not seen by the human eye. Now, with "cooincidence" being the trump card of evolutionism, there really is nothing in all of existence that cannot be explained away, is there?
I mean, one could argue that ancient writings ascribing "water" as the larger part of the human makeup were simply spun from a superstitious imagination and just happened to be on the mark this time. Right?
Would it be inappropriate for science to predict, based on this writing, that the human body would be found to be comprised mostly of water?
Anyway, I'm beginning to like this evolution stuff more all the time. Can't think of a single notion I cannot make up or excuse at will and without accountability. Can just brush certain facts aside as cooincidence.
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.