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."
Creationism has a universe to observe, doesn't it? How's that for a first step? Would you consider this necessary to presenting evidence of any kind?
The universe both creationists and evolutionists are given to observe has design in it, right? I've asked you this before and have yet to get a straight answer. Are there things that have the attributes of "design" in the world or not? Does design even exist?
Now before you try to assume where I am going from here, I need to know if you accept these two things as fact. 1.) That the universe exists, and 2.) that it has design in it. Once we're on the same page with these two things, I will proceed in the discussion with you.
Thankfully Newton, Galileo, etc. did not think this way. How does the assumption that "God did it" negate any need for study? I don't see the connection. 2462 -fester-
It doesn't 'negate', -- it 'discourages' such study, -- as many victims of the inquisition tell us. 2476 -tpaine-
Take a look at the history of the Inquistion and tell me if it was driven by the philosophy that "God did it. You'd best not engage in scientific study or else . . ." -fester-
That is almost exactly the thrust of what 'scientific heretics' were told. - Read much history, fester?
Speaking of inquisitions, I can well imagine creationists making genuine scientitific discoveries but having them ridiculed and discarded via evolutionist "inquisitions" in certain universities. Students, likewise, have been at the receiving end of "inquisitions" when they suggest there might just be some intelligent design behind all this stuff that looks and acts so consistently.
You imagine lots of amusing things fester.
Did you imagine that you made a rebuttal to my post at #2457? - Or perhaps you just concede.
If you are serious, you might want to look at post 1395
Why should you have to if your rights are inherent?
Your right to life exists simply because you are alive;
That's a statement of belief not evidence of rights being inherent.
The universe is under no obligation to respect any rights you will not defend.
Then rights are not inherent.
I think you're getting ahead of the debate. First we need to define our terms. Like "design," for example.
Answer me this: What characteristics would a designed universe exhibit that would allow one to distinguish it from an undesigned universe?
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
If you are serious, you might want to look at post 2187
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
Bingo!
. . . when you infer something, it is normally based on facts and knowledge.
Okay. Both evolutionists and creationists make inferences based on the facts and knowledge that 1.) the universe exists, and 2.) it has design. From these two facts, is it totally crazy or unreasonable to infer the existence of intelligence? No. Both parties will admit to the existence of intelligence also.
Now, based on the sheer amount of design and intelligence that exists in the known universe, I do not think - based on these facts - it is crazy or unreasonable to infer that a greater intelligence brought it about and sustains it. That does not mean I must necessarily make this inference shape my observations. No. All those simple observations can be made easily, even without tools to observe the universe more closely.
The remarkable thing is, the more effective the tools of observation become, the more evidence is revealed to show design and intelligence. The inferences made by those who adhere to creation theory do not effect the amount of design or intelligence available for all to see, but they do indeed have consequences when they play themselves out in life's other discplines.
"When the process is NOT understood, the easiest way to get out of it, is to say, a miracle happened, or godidit, or it MUST have been intelligent design. . .
. . .or evolution did it." I don't think creationists have cornered the market on intellectual laziness. Both disciplines have convenient ways of dismissing evidence that counters their presuppositions.
BTW. You lost me on that math equation (even when simply put). If you could lay it out with a little more explanation I might be able to consider where you are going with this and how it effects my arguments. Thanks.
'Creator' or not, still makes perfect sense to me.
Creation/God...REFORMATION(Judeo-Christianity)---secular-govt.-humanism/SCIENCE---CIVILIZATION!
Originally the word liberal meant social conservatives(no govt religion--none) who advocated growth and progress---mostly technological(knowledge being absolute/unchanging)based on law--reality... UNDER GOD---the nature of GOD/man/govt. does not change. These were the Classical liberals...founding fathers-PRINCIPLES---stable/SANE scientific reality/society---industrial progress...moral/social character-values(private/personal) GROWTH(limited NON-intrusive PC Govt/religion---schools)!
is going...
Evolution...Atheism-dehumanism---TYRANNY(pc/liberal/govt-religion/rhetoric)...
Then came the SPLIT SCHIZOPHRENIA/ZOMBIE/BRAVE-NWO1984 LIBERAL NEO-Soviet Darwin/ACLU America---the post-modern morph age
That's probably because you haven't thought about it. What does the endowing?
By your logic, rights cannot be God-given, as man (and nature) regularly infringes upon such rights as life and liberty; how can the profane infringe upon the divine?
Rights are inherent with the individual -- however, he may enjoy only those rights he is willing to defend. You are alive only as long as you defend your life; you are free only as long as you defend your freedom. If rights come from a source external to the individual (God, the State), that source can opt to rescind those rights. However, an organism's very escence rebels against being deprived of these fundamentals -- we fight to our last breath to live, we rail against being caged. No, I believe it is self-evident that rights are inherent in the organism.
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.