So when do we schedule the next Scopes monkey trial?
In Darby, Pa. the issue resulted in defeat of 8 out of 8 Republicans on the school board that had put ID into the science curriculum with concurrent election of 8 Dems to take their place.
This is a sad day for America.
Unlike the first attempt back in 1999 this does not forbid school districts from teaching evolution nor does it require that they teach intelligent design. But state assessment tests will deal with intelligent design and students could score lower if they are unfamiliar with the subject. Still five members of the board are up for election in 2006 and four of them voted for the new standards. Since the standards don't go into effect until 2007 then the defeat of only two of the four that voted for it would swing the board back the other way and they could vote to drop ID from the curriculum. It's a mess.
bump
I have a question...
Who is to say WHO'S version of intelligent design schools can teach?? For example, I just came back from Baton Rouge a month ago for the Red Cross and there were tons of Scientologists volunteers working in the shelter teaching that some extraterrestrial name Xenu forced Thetans here to die and their souls possess us.
As goofy as that sounds, the Scientologists have a lot of moolah and a lot of clout with certain local democratic politicians.
Are you sure you want to open this up as Science in the schools?
Soon Kansas will have the finest education 19th century minds can provide.
Aircraft factories and commodities futures traders will move out to make way for the growth, high-income industries of buggy whip manufacture and production of burkahs for export to fellow theocracies.
Nothing of value rests on the toe. It's vile hooey. Telling people to be sceptical is a good thing...
I was in the garage, sipping a suds, watching the CBS Evening News with Bob "Pinnochio" Scheiffer on my glorious "12 B/W" garage TV. Keep pushing God out of our lives, and look out...............the Great Oz has spoken
To All.
Citizens have a fundamental right to freedom of conscience! Evolution/Intelligent Design/Creationism is merely one example among hundreds in which government tramples freedom of conscience and therefore should never be in the business of education.
Evolution, even though a science, has both political and religious, non-neutral consequences for the children. Why? Because it concerns the origin of human life.
Re: Political consequences
If humans are here on earth entirely because of natural causes, and teachers in powerful positions of influence neglect to mention a Creator, or are forced to address a Creator, then there are political consequences.
Our Declaration of Independence states that our rights as humans are an endowment of a Creator. If there is no Creator then the only conclusion is that our human rights are creations of people and are granted to us by government. BIG difference! With political consequences. However, there are many citizens who do not believe in a Creator and, indeed, wish to have their children taught that humans determine and government institutions grant rights.
Regarding religious consequences:
It is HIGHLY offensive to many parents in many cultural traditions to surgically excise the mention of God as it regards the origin of life. And NO!...It is not OK with these parents for the concept of a Creator to be neglected in the classroom and only addressed at home. Culture and religious traditions can not be dissected by teachers in position of power and influence in this manner without also dissecting the child's soul.
Yet,,,,on the other hand, there are those parents whose religious traditions and culture are hostile to any belief in a Creator. For them, to have powerful and influential teachers proposing Intelligent Design or Creationism is equally offensive.
There is absolutely no possible way, that any government school can resolve these religious and political tensions without seriously violating and trampling the freedom of conscience of large segments of the population. The school WILL trample the First Amendment Rights of at least some. It is wrong for any government school to trample the First Amendment rights of even one child or one family.
Then we have the problem of coercion. Government schools are NOT voluntary for those who have no alternative. Armed police, social workers, and courts will use the threats of prison and foster care to FORCE attendance if the child or parent is resistant.
Also.....government schools are funded through taxes that are NOT voluntary. The government can and WILL sell at auction the property of those who refuse to fund the approved government school political, religious, non-religious, or anti-religious agenda ( evolution is merely one example) of the government school.
Finally,,,,NO government school can be equally respectful of every political, cultural, or religious tradition of every citizen who is FORCED to attend the school. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE!
Therefore....Government schools are grossly unconstitutional on both the federal and state levels.
The following is an excellent essay: http://www.newswithviews.com/Stuter/stuter9.htm
Is Evolution, Intelligent Design, or Creation Science important enough to threaten parents with armed police action, foster care placement, or even prison if they resist the demands of any of those demanding their particular education worldview?
Is Evolution, Intelligent Design, or Creation important enough that you would allow the supporters of any of these topics to threaten other citizens who resist paying for it, with the sheriff's auction of their home or business, or even prison?
That is what government schools ARE. They are an assault on the freedom of conscience. They rip and tear at the most fundamental core cultural and traditional beliefs of many.
Any government powerful enough to shove evolution down the throats of resistant children is powerful enough to force intelligent design or creationism down other people's children's throats too!
The biggest political bully wins! The Prize? .....Yes, the hearts and minds of the next generation of voters, professors, journalists, judges, religious leaders, artists, writers, and community leaders of all types.
If the supporters of iIntelligent design can just remind people that Einstein believed in intelligent design.
As a policy matter, I can understand why Dorothy left Kansas. Are these folks elected officials? If so, they might consider burnishing their resumes.
IMHO,Intelligent Design, as held by intelligent people, says,
We who believe, in Intelligent Design, including many heavy-duty scientists, are no threat to science, and vice versa. Evolution, which really is the best working theory we have, belongs in science class, where a wise teacher might allude to the fact that a lot of really smart people, including Jimmy Carter (oops, poor example) and even Darwin, believe in Intelligent Design, which since it can't be scientifically demonstrated, is a great discussion for philosophy class, or religion class. Where is the big deal here?
“Further, he (the Pope) seems to be cautioning those who have been claiming Church endorsement of the full-bodied, design-defeating version of Darwin's theory of evolution, which, after all, is often little more than philosophical materialism applied to science,” added Chapman.
Chapman noted that in his very first homily as Pope, Benedict XVI had rebuked the idea that human beings are mere products of evolution, and that, like his predecessor, John Paul II, the new Pope has a long record of opposition to scientific materialism.
excerpt from: http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=3015&program=News&callingPage=discoMainPage