Posted on 02/28/2006 4:05:45 AM PST by PatrickHenry
House lawmakers scuttled a bill that would have required public school students to be told that evolution is not empirically proven - the latest setback for critics of evolution.
The bill's sponsor, Republican state Sen. Chris Buttars, had said it was time to rein in teachers who were teaching that man descended from apes and rattling the faith of students. The Senate earlier passed the measure 16-12.
But the bill failed in the House on a 28-46 vote Monday. The bill would have required teachers to tell students that evolution is not a fact and the state doesn't endorse the theory.
Rep. Scott Wyatt, a Republican, said he feared passing the bill would force the state to then address hundreds of other scientific theories - "from Quantum physics to Freud" - in the same manner.
"I would leave you with two questions," Wyatt said. "If we decide to weigh in on this part, are we going to begin weighing in on all the others and are we the correct body to do that?"
Buttars said he didn't believe the defeat means that most House members think Charles Darwin's theory of evolution is correct.
"I don't believe that anybody in there really wants their kids to be taught that their great-grandfather was an ape," Buttars said.
The vote represents the latest loss for critics of evolution. In December, a federal judge barred the school system in Dover, Pa., from teaching intelligent design alongside evolution in high school biology classes.
Also last year, a federal judge ordered the school system in suburban Atlanta's Cobb County to remove from biology textbooks stickers that called evolution a theory, not a fact.
Earlier this year, a rural California school district canceled an elective philosophy course on intelligent design and agreed never to promote the topic in class again.
But critics of evolution got a boost in Kansas in November when the state Board of Education adopted new science teaching standards that treat evolution as a flawed theory, defying the view of science groups.
double yum!!
Well since you can't understand theology what is the point anyway
So much for the Romance languages; how about the Finnish - chinese - Bantu?
You didn't post any Indian eyewitness accounts. Do that and maybe I'll respond.
That's why it's SUPPOSED to work: it didn't.
Tell that to your secretary as you DICTATE a letter to her!
"Well zeeba doesn't go down your little rat holes, stick to the matter at hand"
You first, oh veracity-challenged one.
Nope... that is called a deposition.
lol. I don't know Elsie, we are arguing with the B team. I guess the other ones have gone into the bowels of Darwin Central to cry when you showed up
I once heard someone say something like, "Computers make very fast, but very accurate mistakes."
I posted about this a while back.
There is a well-developed theory of language evolution. A lot of very clever people have been working on it for a very long time.
http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Linguistic_Evolution
You MIGHT have to get that "CRIKEY - that's a mean one!" guy, for you COULD have ALLIGATORS!!!!
"Tell that to your secretary as you DICTATE a letter to her!"
Which I then read to ensure that the letter indeed says what I intended it to say, and then I sign the letter, authenticating it as my writing...
...and there is no signature on the Gospel of Mark, therefore, it is not authenticated, and is therefore not eyewitness testimony of any sort, and is therefore Mark's hearsay (assuming Mark actually wrote the thing). Again, QED.
Doesn't the fact that the Aztecs had the Feathered Serpent God Quetzalcoatl, and the fact that science has discovered feathered dinosaurs, count as evidence that the Aztec Way is the True Way?
"Nope... that is called a deposition."
No, it isn't. Unsigned documents that have not been notarized are not depositions.
Oh why not, after all they worshipped the jaquar and look at it.. now its a car
ping me if the A team comes back, these guys are too dull for me, later
This coming from the poster that claims that Mark mislocated some important sites in Palestine?
Pot, kettle and black.
"This coming from the poster that claims that Mark mislocated some important sites in Palestine?"
That's the way it looks to me--unless you really believed that, despite allegedly being sent first to convert the lost sheep of Israel, he chose to dawdle among the heathen.
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.