Posted on 02/27/2004 12:04:20 PM PST by Michael_Michaelangelo
OKLAHOMA CITY (CNHI) — The Oklahoma House passed a bill Monday that would require public school textbooks that discuss evolution to include a disclaimer stating that it is a controversial theory and not fact.
Rep. Bill Graves successfully included the language in House Bill 2194, a measure that originally changed the format for Braille versions of instructional materials.
“I think so many of the textbooks make it appear that evolution is a scientific fact and it’s not,” said Graves, R-Oklahoma City. “Even the U.S. Supreme Court says it’s a theory, so I was just trying to make that clear.
“I think it’s very important for children to know,” Graves said. “If they just believe that they came from some slime in a swamp that’s a whole lot different from being created in the image of God.”
According to the bill, any state school district textbook that discusses evolution would have to include a disclaimer that states, in part, “This textbook discusses evolution, a controversial theory which some scientists present as scientific explanation for the origin of living things, such as plants and humans. No one was present when life first appeared on earth. Therefore, any statement about life’s origins should be considered as theory, not fact.”
The disclaimer goes on to state, “Study hard and keep an open mind. Someday you may contribute to the theories of how living things appeared on earth.”
The bill passed on a 96-0 vote and now heads to the Senate.
Officials with the State Department of Education did not return a phone call seeking comment.
Sean Murphy is the Capitol Bureau reporter in Oklahoma for Community Newspaper Holdings, Inc. He can be reached at smurphy@cnhi.com.
No, but I have prayed for many other things. A prayer like that is more a temptation prayer than a needful prayer. "If you answer this prayer, I will believe" is not the kind of prayers God listens to and not the kind of true prayers Christians would offer up to their Lord. Prayers of people with no personal relationship with Jesus are in vain. Sin is the divide. Let Jesus lift that barrier, and see for yourself.
John 3:16
I have a joke:
a jew's been coming to the Western Wall praying for world peace for 50 years. eventually somebody asks him, "so how does it feel after 50 years of prayer?" he answers: "like I'm talking to a goddamn wall!"
;)
This would seem to require the statement that the Middle-Eastern Story of Creation is only a controversial theory and not a fact.
Well, okay, maybe in Oklahoma ...
Think it out. Evolution goes to the core of our belief systems - whether we believe in the theory of happenstance or some form of creationism. Many Evo-Reactionaries push evolution as fact because it makes them feel their beliefs about the origin of life are facts and not beliefs. Because of this a disclaimer is need. The disclaimer merely states the truth. Although some Evo-Reactionaries claim differently, science has not proven that God(s) does not exist or the Christian view of creation (or any other religion) is not true.
All the disclaimer does is state the truth and challenge the students to think for themselves – it seems to me only science-fascists would be against this.
There was a time when people that believed the earth is flat could make the same statement. That should make you very intellectually uncomfortable.
I may be wrong, but are you trying to say that all current scientific explanation should be considered fact? About 500 years ago science felt pretty confident in the current scientific theories. Today we know many were flat out wrong. Odds are 500 years from now the same will be true for our current popular scientific theories. Unlike religion, science is every-changing.
I think any disclaimer concerning evolution should say which aspects of the theory are debated and which aspects are agreed upon. And evolution is not about life's origins, but how life changes over time, so why should this disclaimer focus on this aspect?
While there remain disagreements among scientists over the specifics of long-term evolution--for instance, the two opposing models of punctuated equilibrium and gradual change--there is a general consensus among the scientific community regarding the basic components of the theory.
There is so much evidence for biological evolution, that I think we can teach it as a scientific fact. We need to teach children that it's the mechanisms of change which are hotly debated and theoretical.
That way, the students understand the scientific process and enter college understanding the major scientific debates of today, not of two centuries ago.
First off, please don't use that language.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1070896/posts
Second, a true Jew would not take the Lord's name in vain. Heard of the 10 commandments?
Third, a true Jew would be thankful for the miracle of having a home nation just like the Bible foretold. Think of all the prayers answer there.
Fourth, if that is the only level of discussion you can offer then we are through conversing.
"Blessed is he who is not offended because of Me" (Mat. 11:6; Luke 7:23). In Galilee, Jesus did not plead with his neighbors to understand Him when "they were offended at Him" (Mat. 13:57; Mark 6:3). If unbelievers are offended, so be it (cf. Luke 14:3-4; John 5:8-16). "Shake off the dust from your feet" (Mat. 10:14).
It's not fair to compare the science of today with the science of 500 years ago. For one, we follow the scientific process when conducting research. A scientist forming a hypothesis, evaluating data and identifying problems will make more meaningful discoveries than someone making wild claims by boiling the guts of birds.
Also, the scientific community today is less hindered in its research by the church than scientists 500 years ago.
And who says religion never changes? Churches have split, people have made different interpretations of sacred texts and religion has played different parts throughout the centuries. Surely today's Christians don't practice the same religion as the early Christians.
Happened in the third post, right before yours. LOL
jeez luise, all I said was "goddamn"
We can be pretty sure they will say the same thing in 500 years about our modern science. Don't let you modern-day ego get the best of you.
And who says religion never changes?
I realized that was a can of worms when I posted it. Better put: in the last 2000 years science has changed a lot more than religion.
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.