Posted on 07/14/2006 10:52:22 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
As the August 1, 2006, Kansas primary elections approach, evolution is a burning issue. The state board of education is at the center of the furor, of course; in November 2005, the board voted 6-4 to adopt a set of state science standards that were rewritten, under the tutelage of local "intelligent design" activists, to impugn the scientific status of evolution. The standards were denounced by a host of critics, including a group of 38 Nobel laureates (PDF), the National Science Teachers Association, the National Academy of Sciences, the , the American Institute for Biological Sciences, the committee that wrote the original standards, the authors of the Fordham Foundation's report (PDF) on state science standards, and the Kansas Association of Teachers of Science. In addition, the standards have been rejected by at least one local school district. Because the terms of five of the seats on the board expire in 2006, the primary election (as well as the general election in November) afford a chance for supporters of evolution education to change the balance of power on the board, just as they did in 2000.
In District 1, incumbent Janet Waugh, a supporter of evolution education, is facing a primary challenge from Jesse Hall, who, the Lawrence Journal World (July 6, 2006) reports, is backed by supporters of the antievolution majority on the board. In District 3, incumbent John Bacon, a member of the antievolution majority, is facing a primary challenge from Harry McDonald and David Oliphant; the winner will face Don Weiss in the general election. In District 5, incumbent Connie Morris, a member of the antievolution majority, is facing a primary challenge from Sally Cauble; the winner will face Tim Cruz. In District 7, incumbent Ken Willard, a member of the antievolution majority, is facing a primary challenge from Donna Viola and M. T. Liggett; the winner will face Jack Wempe. In District 9, Iris Van Meter, a member of the antievolution majority, is not running for re-election, but her son-in-law Brad Patzer hopes to replace her. He will face Jana Shaver in the primary, and the winner will face Kent Runyan in the general election. In their responses to a questionnaire from the Kansas Alliance for Science, all of the challengers expressed opposition to the state science standards as adopted.
In their recent editorials, the state's major newspapers cited the positions of the candidates on the state science standards as a major consideration. For example, the Wichita Eagle (July 9, 2006) commented, "It's hard to know whether to laugh or cry about the doings of the Kansas State Board of Education. A faction of far-right conservatives has turned the state board into its own ideological hobbyhorse, drawing widespread condemnation from the academic community, not to mention international ridicule. ... The board's ideological and ill-informed approach to evolution and science standards has been nothing short of a fiasco." Across the Mississippi, the Kansas City Star (July 9, 2006) commented, "Kansans deserve a better state Board of Education. The Aug. 1 primary election gives voters an opportunity to make much-needed changes in a board that has become seriously sidetracked by religious issues. The board attracted national and even international ridicule by including criticism of Darwin’s theory of evolution in the science standards that direct school districts in their curriculum choices."
Promoters of "intelligent design" both inside and outside the state are mounting campaigns to defend the flawed standards. The Lawrence Journal-World (July 8, 2006) reported that the Discovery Institute was launching such a campaign; Steve Case, the cochair of the committee that wrote the original standards, responded, "Everybody sees through the intent of the Discovery Institute," adding, "Kansans are not appreciative of folks coming in from the outside, trying to explain it to us." A representative of the Discovery Institute told Channel 49 News (July 7, 2006) that the timing of the campaign was unrelated to the primary elections, prompting Jack Krebs, the president of Kansas Citizens for Science to comment, "I can't even believe they said that ... it's the next two or three weeks that you really catch the public's attention about these issues." The Discovery Institute refused to divulge on the cost of its campaign, which reportedly is to include a web-based information campaign, a petition drive, and a series of radio advertisements. Meanwhile, the Intelligent Design Network, based in Shawnee Mission, Kansas, is conducting its own series of presentations throughout Kansas in late July.
As for the gubernatorial election, the Johnson County Sun (July 13, 2006) asked all seven of the Republican hopefuls to answer a questionnaire including the question, "Should public schools be allowed to teach intelligent design in science classes?" Jim Barnett answered yes, adding, "I believe all views should be taught, but these decisions should be made by local school boards without state mandates or restrictions"; Robin Jennison answered yes; Timothy Pickell answered no, adding, "While I have a strong personal opinion concerning God's brilliant work, we should teach science in science classes and religion in a religion class"; and Rex Crowell answered yes, adding, "Science classes should be permitted to acknowledge that some believe in an intelligent design theory. Personally, my God is great enough to intelligently design evolution." Ken Canfield declined to answer the question, and Dennis Hawver and Richard Rodewald failed to answer the questionnaire at all. The winner of the primary will face incumbent governor Kathleen Sebelius (D) in the November election; Sebelius issued a statement deploring the adoption of the antievolution standards in November 2005.
|
YEC INTREP
This, believe it not, is not my top issue, but elections these days are decided by fractions of percentages. It is shameful of so-called conservatives to throw away votes on a lose-lose issue.
"It's hard to know whether to laugh or cry about the doings of the Kansas State Board of Education. A faction of far-right conservatives has turned the state board into its own ideological hobbyhorse, drawing widespread condemnation from the academic community, not to mention international ridicule. ... The board's ideological and ill-informed approach to evolution and science standards has been nothing short of a fiasco."
Now there's a fine example of "fair and balanced reportig." Or ... could it be a case of "the pot calling the kettle black?" The reader must decide for himself.
There's a post on another thread that sheds some light on these issues, if anyone wants to go look, here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1062357/posts?page=107#107
It's relatively unimportant how crazy things get in Kansas. The importance of this issue is what it does to the national image of conservatism. The more these people lose, as they did in Dover -- Dover boots board -- the more the rest of the Republican party will learn to get these people under control. We want their votes, but not their lunatic leadership.
For me, in a school board election, they'd have to search rather a bit to find a more significant issue.
OK, it would be a top issue in a school board election if anyone in my neighborhood was suicidal enough to propose teaching ID.
Our school system simply allows kids to opt out of any controversial subjects. The rest of the kids do not get dumbed down classes. The short bus kids are on their own on standardized tests.
"For me, in a school board election, they'd have to search rather a bit to find a more significant issue."
Really? For me, a more significant issue would be how they planned to actually teach kids to read, write, and do basic math. That seems to be the big problem these days.
If someone were to make that an issue I'd sort of wonder which approach they hadnd why it was better than the current one.
I could see in some low performing districts it might be a major issue, granted.
It's the whole party's fault that we turned control over to the Taliban-wing of the GOP. Let's get it right, folks. We do NOT want a theocracy in this country, and if you continue to impose your religious values in politics and education you're going to find yourselves on the outside looking in.
Your selected quote was from an editorial.
Follow the money!!! Some people will not share the government take.... the Supreme Court said they did not have to.
All belongs to the Heavenly Father and He will use and choose whomever He so chooses, even nobodies in the world of science.
The board members should have voted by raising their tails and throwing coconuts at the vote counter.
Evolution is the biggest lie EVER perpetrated upon the human race (from the pit of Hell)! And... the Evolutionists know it... that's why they get SOOO upset when anyone dares question their religion! Without facts you do anger, ask Valarie Plame.
You forgot the /sarcasm tag.
The war among Republicans is why Johnson County, which voted for Goldwater in 1964, now has a Democrat congressman.
"Evolution is the biggest lie EVER perpetrated upon the human race (from the pit of Hell)! And... the Evolutionists know it... that's why they get SOOO upset when anyone dares question their religion!"
An evolution supporter couldn't do a better job or posting a parody of creationism. Thanks for doing our work for us.
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.