Another work of brilliance from the already too crowded "judges who need to have their head shoved in a pot of boiling water" category...
Seems to me science teachers should be able to teach science the way scientists see fit, and not according to the peculiar religious beliefs of hack local politicians.
The sticker was dumb but they had a right to leave it in. It's not as if they were gonna learn any science other than scaremongering environmentalism anyway.
If all schools were charter schools and/or private schools then nobody could complain what was taught in them. I think this is what we should be focusing on. School Choice.
Personally, I'd like my kids to be taught evolution. There is good science behind it, and the thinknig processes gained are valuable even though it is still somewhat of a mysterious phenomena.
Also, the theories behind evolution are not just used in biology, but also in computer science (selecting out the best programs and when programs copy itself and select) and economics.
Contrary to popular belief I also think evolution is at least somewhat compatible with the bible. Is it not john (or perhaps mathews) who said something along the lines: 'one day is to the Lord what a thousand years is on earth and a day on earth can be athousand years to the lord' (paraphrasing).
It seems as though the bible itself is saying not take everything within it literally.
Thus, it is not as simple as one theory being against the other (IMO).
What's unconstitutional about it? I guess Free Speech is only for the atheist Left.
Bunch of wankers. Congress and the President really need to do something. This is out of control.
Darwin's SUBTITLE of his most famous "Origin of Species" work is "By the Preservation of Favored Races". He was referring to ALL animals with such a reference, including HUMANS. Darwin claimed that the "fight for survival" also applied between human races. "Favored races" emerged victorious from this struggle. According to Darwin the favored race were the European whites. As for Asian and African races, they had fallen behind in the fight for survival.
At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes ? will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.
Darwin saw the natives of Australia and Negroes as being at the same level as gorillas and claimed that these races would disappear. As for the other races which he saw as "inferior," he maintained that it was essential to prevent them multiplying and so for these races to be brought to extinction.
So how about Darwin's teachings on the human "races" be put into textbook form. Then, let's take a copy of the book to the judge and ask him "Your honor, are you opposed to us putting a sticker on this book stating that Darwin's theory is just that, THEORY, and not proven fact?"
unconstitutional??? Can someone elaborate as to how the judge came to that conclusion?
This Judge in effect has ruled truth in advertising, un-Constitutional.
The text of the sticker made no mention of creationism. All it said was (paraphrasing) "Evolution is a theory, not a fact, and must be analyzed critically." And that's it. This is a bad ruling and will hopefully be reversed on appeal.
When was evolution PROVEN to be factual? Did I miss it? I thought it was the "Theory of Evolution" Theories are unproven facts. If it's not proven how can it be taught as a fact?
This idiot judge was appointed by none other than the Felon, Clintoon. Does that clear it all up?
all i no about evolution is that darwin said the ocean iguana "evolved" from land iguanas... isn't it still just an iguana that learned to swim?
evolution means to turn into something different, adapting means to learn a new skill...
there's gonna be a lot of splainin to do when all these apes get to the pearly gates and st peter will only have room for them in heaven's zoo.
teeman
Things continue to be out of control. A local school board placing a sticker inside of a textbook is now a violation of the Federal Constitution.
The judge is an idiot (and, no surprise, a leftist).
The sticker, far from being any sort of establishment of religion, is on the textbooks to begin with to PREVENT an establishment of religion already present in said books-- the presentation of a unprovable religion known as "The Theory of Evolution".
Not that I favor the teaching of creationism in public schools either, but I am just smart enough not to buy the crud liberals sell each other about how creationism is a threat to the First Amendment. It just isn't, at least no more than the current Evolution malarky (based on someone's faith in science as a replacement for God and the originator of mankind) most schoolbooks try to pass off as "undisputed" and "secular".
Maybe we need to abolish the public schools. More and more they are just plain failing our kids. If you did away with all the school taxes, people could probably afford alternative educational opportunities. If the government contributed at all, it could be with vouchers issued to any and all.
Who knew that theories were constitutional and that facts weren't?
January 14, 2005PBS Station Pulls Intelligent Design Documentary
by Stuart Shepard
An affiliate of PBS — not the first network that comes to mind when you think of fairness — has pulled a program saying it's "unfair."
A public television station in New Mexico recently took a program that challenges evolution off its schedule — supposedly in the name of "fairness" and "impartiality." Though you might wonder when PBS became worried about fairness, it seems they are now so concerned because the "problem" — as they say — is that the video was funded by Christians.
In the documentary, "Unlocking the Mystery of Life," a group of scientists argue that certain aspects of biology are too complex to be explained by evolution. They say everything points to a designer.
KNME-TV, the Albuquerque, N.M., PBS station, had scheduled the show, then abruptly cut it. Though no one from KNME responded to a Family News in Focus interview request, they did tell the Associated Press the problem was that five Christian groups had funded its production.
Marshal Berman, a former New Mexico Board of Education vice president, believes the show would have a place on a religious station, but should not be aired on PBS.
"Certainly in many cases you need to present two points of view, but not always," Berman said, "and certainly not if there's not a scientific basis for a science show."
But Joe Renick with Intelligent Design Net-New Mexico, said the real problem is not the content, which is scientifically based, but rather those scientists who don't want anyone to hear an opposing view to Darwinian evolution.
"Any time there's going to be something that might cast favorable light upon the ideas of intelligent design or might cast unfavorable light on evolution," Renick said, "then they'll jump in and exert their influence; and that was the case here."
He says evidence in nature clearly points to a designer, and the science supports a Christian worldview.
In full disclosure, Focus on the Family actually provided funding for the creation of "Unlocking the Mystery of Life." The documentary has, however, aired on many other PBS stations, and the DVD has been sold on the National PBS Web site.
FOR MORE INFORMATION To learn more about the documentary — and the science behind it — please see The Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture Web site.
LINK TO ARTICLE: http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/A0035170.cfm