Posted on 12/28/2005 3:49:52 AM PST by PatrickHenry
US. District Judge John E. Jones III's decision to bar the teaching of ''intelligent design'' in the Dover, Pa., public school district on grounds that it is a thinly veiled effort to introduce a religious view of the world's origins is welcome for at least two reasons.
First, it exposes the sham attempt to take through the back door what proponents have no chance of getting through the front door. Jones rebuked advocates of ''intelligent design,'' saying they repeatedly lied about their true intentions. He noted that many of them had said publicly that their intent was to introduce into the schools a biblical account of creation. Jones properly wondered how people who claim to have such strong religious convictions could lie, thus violating prohibitions in the book that they proclaim as their source of truth and standard for living.
Culture has long passed by advocates of intelligent design, school prayer and numerous other beliefs and practices that were once tolerated, even promoted, in public education. People who think that they can reclaim the past have been watching too many repeats of Leave it to Beaver on cable television. Those days are not coming back anytime soon, if at all.
Culture, including the culture of education, now opposes what it once promoted or at least tolerated. The secular left, which resists censorship in all its forms when it comes to sex, library books and assigned materials that teach the ''evils'' of capitalism and ''evil America,'' is happy to censor any belief that can be tagged ``religious.''
Jones' ruling will be appealed and after it is eventually and predictably upheld by a Supreme Court dominated by Republican appointees (Jones was named to the federal bench by President Bush, who has advocated the teaching of creation), those who have tried to make the state do its job for them will have yet another opportunity to wise up.
This leads to the second reason for welcoming Jones' ruling. It should awaken religious conservatives to the futility of trying to make a secular state reflect their beliefs. Too many people have wasted too much time and money since the 1960s, when prayer and Bible reading were outlawed in public schools, trying to get these and a lot of other things restored. The modern secular state should not be expected to teach Genesis 1, or any other book of the Bible, or any other religious text.
That the state once did such things, or at least did not undermine what parents taught their children, is irrelevant. The culture in which we now live no longer reflects the beliefs of our grandparents' generation.
For better, or for worse (and a strong case can be made that things are much worse), people who cling to the beliefs of previous generations have been given another chance to do what they should have been doing all along.
Religious parents should exercise the opportunity that has always been theirs. They should remove their children from state schools with their ''instruction manuals'' for turning them into secular liberals and place them in private schools -- or home school them -- where they will be taught the truth, according to their parents' beliefs. Too many parents who would never send their children to a church on Sunday that taught doctrines they believed to be wrong have had no problem placing them in state schools five days a week where they are taught conflicting doctrines and ideas.
Private schools or home schooling costs extra money (another reason to favor school choice) and extra time, but what is a child worth? Surely, a child is more valuable than material possessions.
Our children are our letters to the future. It's up to parents to decide whether they want to send them ''first class'' or ``postage due.''
Rulings such as this should persuade parents who've been waffling to take their kids and join the growing exodus from state schools into educational environments more conducive to their beliefs.
My husband and I also pay high taxes for a school system we do not benefit from, because we did not have children at all. However, we don't complain about it because it is beneficial to society to educate its future citizens. We don't expect a refund simply because we did not reproduce, yet you want one because you just don't want to use the public schools.
No matter what you think about ID or creationism, it certainly doesn't constitute any form of "evil". You've got a complex. Denying deity to science isn't evil, unless science is to be considered a religion. Perhaps this is true for you.
WHy do you put up with them confiscating your money and spraying it all over the place for ANYTHING beyond Constitutional limits? The peoblem isn't just education and schools- it's everywhere the government has exceeded it's role.
You're swallowing the socialist line quite nicely. You would have made a good Democrat in the 60s with that kind of thinking. I'm not trying to be obnoxious, but step back and look at what you are accepting.
Don't make me say it.
It corrupts Christians and leads them to lie.
> The problem is not to shift children from public to private or home school them. The problem is money and a voice in spending that money.
There have been several attempts for IDers to get onto the school board around here. They have failed spectacularly. I was not the least bit surprised that everyone who was up for election on the Dover schoolboard and who advocated ID was defeated. This subject is a loser in an election. The average person does not want a religious nutjob in charge of their kids. Unfortunately, the anti-religious nutjobs do a much better job of concealing their true motives, so they get elected.
What is needed is a board that is concerned about teaching basics instead of teaching either religion or anti-religion. I don't see it happening, though.
When a army turns, cuts and runs. . .that's when the slaughter begins. . .let's take the fight to the enemy ON HIS OWN TUFF!!LET US CONTINUE TO WHINE FOR JUSTICE!!!
Concede no territory that is God's!!
Well, that's the deal when we buy a house; some of our property taxes go to the schools. In return, the fact that we are in a VERY good school district has benefits for our property values.
Why do I put up with "confiscation"? It's the law where I live, and tax protesters have a way of living in drafty jail cells rather than comfortable houses like mine. What do you suggest I do, simply refuse to pay the $4500 a year? My freedom is worth rather more than that to me.
Good post. I think I tried to touch on some of the same thoughts in my post 26.
Government schools are abysmal on nearly every level. Even kids interested in real science are better off in a good private school that teaches creationism. I sent my kid to a private school like that and he's doing just fine as a science major in college.
Cal Thomas is the most-distributed conservative columnist out there. He is also associated with many Christian organizations. Not exactly a libertarian.
Ask your son when the SOUL was inserted in the "human" species.
Yes, it's the law, but I'm not going to just roll over and take it. Laws can be changed. (And I agree, tax protesters are fighting a losing battle on a dirty, unwinnable playing field.)
Go to http://www.fairtax.org
That's the beginning of the solution. It abolishes all federal taxes and replaces them with a retail sales tax. Changes the whole game, and changes the psychology of the dependency class.
And you may, in fact, be wildly wrong about those who you think "elect" to be childless.
I know quite a few also, but as I have gotten to know some of them better, I have found that more than a few of them tried like hell to have kids, tried IVF, and nothing worked.
Just a thought.
" It abolishes all federal taxes and replaces them with a retail sales tax. Changes the whole game"
Yes; and would certainly shut down this consumer-based economy in a hurry. That's changing the game, all right!
You need to take another look. An economy based on debt will eventually implode anyway.
It's pointless for the two sides to come to an agreement over this issue. Overall, we should, as conservatives, agree that the government has no place in education, since they suck so bad at it.
@@@@@
Well said! Agreeing that government education is not healthy for our children and yet arguing that our only recourse is to ignore it, does not address the problem. Tax money should not be used for harmful agencies and institutions.
I don't know. He's definitely a Christian. And a conservative. There are Christian libertarians, so he could be that and conservative too. I don't see that as an incompatible mix, although I'm sure that others do. It sounds like a description of some of the Founders, actually. But that's a whole separate topic.
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.