Posted on 08/18/2008 9:35:10 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
With five seats on the State Board of Education up for grabs this year, education advocates say how children learn about evolution hangs in the balance -- and who voters choose could affect Kansas' national reputation.
A frequent flip-flop between moderate and conservative majorities on the 10-member board has resulted in the state changing its science standards four times in the past eight years.
Conservatives have pushed for standards casting doubt on evolution, and moderates have said intelligent design does not belong in the science classroom.
In 2007, a new 6-4 moderate majority removed standards that called evolution into question.
This year, none of the three moderates whose seats are up for election are running again. Only one of the two conservative incumbents is running for re-election...
(Excerpt) Read more at kansas.com ...
Slight of hand? More like being pounded by the fist of oppression.
Anyone who has to sue to silence their opponents doesn’t have much to stand on. All it does is show how weak their position is. Using force to push your viewpoints on others to brainwash them smacks of communism.
Evolution alone has been taught for decades in the public school system and has not yet made a dent in the statistics showing how many people believe in evolution, directed evolution, and creation, and all. Panic then sets in and there are efforts to teach it better, and sooner (grade school). When they see that their strong arm tactics don’t work at the high school level, they decide to try their indoctrination at the grade school level. Get them while they’re young.
In spite of their strong arm tactics, it just goes to show that people know better and that real education is the best defense against brainwashing and indoctrination techniques.
well said.
like the pajamahadeen is to drive-by journalism and Dan Blather.
Here’s how the logic works (borrowed from another site)
Some old timey scientists believed in God.
ID folks believe in God.
Therefore ID should be taught in high-school science class.
Yes, anyone who knows Faraday knows he was a Giant!
So no. You don’t have anything specific to suggest that his Biblical “literalism” extended to denying experimental Scientific data or that he based any of his physical constants upon anything but empirical data.
vs. YOUR logic:
the godless hate God,
by extension they hate anyone who believes in Him, therefore they hijack the courts and activist liberal judges to silence them\ir opponents, be it science, govt, education in general and so on.
The fact that there's no independent evidence that video exists makes you believe in it all the more? Why am I not surprised?
It’s the seriousness of the charge, not the evidence that matters.
Worked in the Duke case.
By gosh, if those creationists and IDers won’t obey, we’ll sue them into submission.
We self-appointed elite know what’s best for them, whether they like it or not.
The unwashed masses must conform.
Your turning into “Christian Rage Guy”. Everything you see is an affront to your religion.
As I’ve said, I’ve dealt with this pathology before:
Speaking up against the endless rage aimed at God and believers doesn’t mean the one speaking out is full of rage.
Speaking up for what is right doesn’t make it worng.
Pointing out hypocrisy doesn’t make one a hypocrite.
SPEAKING OUT AGAINST CENSORSHIP DOESN’T MAKE ONE A CENSOR.
However, just on the subject of being an American, EVERY citizen should be enraged at the ACLU and others not so much because of religion but because they’re so anti-American!
I have his word compared to the mountains of evidence anti-Christians behave exactly so, as I’ve seen for myself.
I don’t have any reason to believe the guy didn’t have anything better to do than make up this scenario...
I’ve seen godless liberal madness up close!
It sounds just like these sneaks!
And the fact that you see these public schools as somehow “independent” speaks VOLUMES!
And he was a creationist.
==You don’t have anything specific to suggest that his Biblical “literalism” extended to denying experimental Scientific data or that he based any of his physical constants upon anything but empirical data.
I don't recall ever suggesting that Faraday's biblical literalism caused him to deny experimental data. But we do know that his biblical literalism inspired much of his scientific research. Indeed, according to many of his biographers, his biblical fundamentalism is what made him so bold in his predictions with respect to his unified theory of electricity and magnetism.
Bottom line: Creation Scientists have a huge and distinguished scientific pedigree!
The teaching of evolution in high school is relatively new. I have a collection of high school biology textbooks from my era, and they don't even list the word evolution in the index.
Evolution wasn't mentioned in high school biology from about the time of the Scopes trial until around 1980. The primary reason for this is that the state of Texas wouldn't buy a textbook that taught evolution, and they were such a big market the publishers simply omitted the concept.
And the curious fact is that in spite of that we've had generations of scientists making huge advances in biology and medicine. Generations of men who weren't taught evolution in high school.
Explain to me again why creation needs to be sued out of the public schools.
==Explain to me again why creation needs to be sued out of the public schools.
Because we have the goods on Darwin’s fairytale, and they don’t want the word getting out. Although, I think the evos already know that sooner or later they’re going to have to toss Darwin overboard. They’re just buying time until they can come up with a new (godless) theory of evolution to takes its place.
The court decisions are available online if you are interested.
I know what the decisions are. I want to know the rationale for the need to sue creationists into silence and force atheistic and secular humanist viewpoints on everyone else, whether they like it or not.
Why the need to censor those who evos disagree with?
First of all, you need to define the terms of the disagreement. What is the alternative theory you wish to teach?
Do you disagree with the Discovery Institute when they say there is no alternative theory? Were they wrong to advise the Dover school board not to promote ID in the classroom?
You'll have a lot better luck getting public support against them if you concentrate on talking about things that have actually happened.
When you start making claims you can't back up you end up looking like a paranoid fool.
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.