State News on Teaching Evolution (American Institute of Biology)

http://www.aibs.org/public-policy/evolution_state_news.html ^

[DBCJR]

The federal education law, No Child Left Behind, requires states establish standards for student assessment. As a consequence, states across the country are working to develop K-12 science standards and model curricula that will ensure students meet these standards. This process has seemingly reinvigorated a host of organizations that oppose the inclusion of evolution in public school curricula or advocate for the inclusion of "alternative theories" ranging from young-Earth creationism to intelligent design.

The AIBS Public Policy Office works with various national and state organizations to monitor and report on state and local threats to the teaching of evolution in public school science courses. The AIBS Public Policy Office reports on these threats through its bi-weekly public policy report. To enable scientists and science educators to better track current and historic challenges to evolution, past public policy report items on evolution education are organized below by state and date.

[DBCJR]

This organization receives federal funding yet disseminates information pertinent to a secularist view, in opposition to Judaic-Christian views, of the origins of the universe and the species. That seems to me to be in direct violation of the seperation of church and state doctrine secularists use against Christians. Is this yet another double standard?

[Borges]

This organization receives federal funding yet disseminates information pertinent to a secularist view what the overwhleming majority of scientists think

Fixed.

[ahayes]

Are you joking?

[scottdeus12]

Is this yet another double standard? Yes it is.... Yet another reson why gubmit schools suck. All schools should be privatized.

[js1138]

How can science not be secular? I mean Isaac Newton is often cited on these threads as having been a Christian, but his rules for reasoning are virtually the definition of methodological naturalism.

[scottdeus12]

“This organization receives federal funding yet disseminates information pertinent to what the overwhleming majority of scientists think”

LOL. So federal funding should be granted because scientists think something is correct. Hilarious.

[Borges]

Yes, the standards for student assesment in a science curriculum should be decided by scientists. What’s so funny?

[js1138]

LOL. So federal funding should be granted because scientists think something is correct. Hilarious.

It got us to the moon. It makes all our military toys work.

[scottdeus12]

“What’s so funny?”

That our government subsidises this....I’m a private school/home school advocate.

[scottdeus12]

“It got us to the moon. It makes all our military toys work.”

Agreed. The issue here is school, not military/space programs.

[JamesP81]

All schools should be privatized.

Hear, hear! I'd support a law to build a wall of separation between school and state.

[JamesP81]

LOL. So federal funding should be granted because scientists think something is correct. Hilarious.

What's sad is that claims even more ridiculous than this one results in federal grants being given.

[scottdeus12]

“Hear, hear! I’d support a law to build a wall of separation between school and state”

Or at least a voucher system for starters.....

[JamesP81]

The federal education law, No Child Left Behind, requires states establish standards for student assessment. As a consequence, states across the country are working to develop K-12 science standards and model curricula that will ensure students meet these standards. This process has seemingly reinvigorated a host of organizations that oppose the inclusion of evolution in public school curricula or advocate for the inclusion of "alternative theories" ranging from young-Earth creationism to intelligent design.

All debate about the validity of evolution aside, could someone tell me exactly which article or amendment to the Constitution gives the federal government the power to regulate education, or the power to spend public money on scientific research grants?

I won't be holding my breath waiting for the answer.

[scottdeus12]

"All debate about the validity of evolution aside, could someone tell me exactly which article or amendment to the Constitution gives the federal government the power to regulate education, or the power to spend public money on scientific research grants?"

[scottdeus12]

oops...

“All debate about the validity of evolution aside, could someone tell me exactly which article or amendment to the Constitution gives the federal government the power to regulate education, or the power to spend public money on scientific research grants?”

Hear the crickets chirping?

[JamesP81]

It got us to the moon. It makes all our military toys work.

Both of which are directly related to national defense, the federal govt's primary constitutional function. But this thread is about schooling. Anyone who has spent any time on FR knows well that nowhere in the Constitution is the govt granted the power to expend public money on education or non-military scientific research.

[TChad]

Is this yet another double standard?

I think this is probably a parody post.

[capt.P]

Thank God someone said it. I was about to break out the “Beware of Dihydrogen Monoxide” thread. Rather than stir the pot, I’m heading for a thread that’s worth debate. See you!

[js1138]

Both of which are directly related to national defense, the federal govt's primary constitutional function. But this thread is about schooling.

Well all sciences, particularly physics, clash with a literal reading of the Bible. Mathematics clashes with a literal Biblical reading of the definition of pi.

If you wish to have schools teach all "alternative" theories to everything in mainstream science, national defence will definitely go in the tank.

To the best of my knowledge, the majority of believers eventually accepted the controversial findings of astronomy (although there is at least on FReeper holdout). I'm sure they will eventually lose interest if protesting against biology.

It's a losing proposition anyway. ID advocates do not really reject common descent or the scientifically determined age of the earth. They have no alternative theory for the cause of evolution, so they have no alternative to teach.