"As a Christian, certainly creationism should be taught." Ah, the stupid, it hurts!! And which type of creation would you like taught? Ex nihilo, creation from chaos, world parent. emergence or maybe earth-diver. Or more specifically which of the hundreds of narratives should be taught? You say teach the controversy, ",,,expose students to both sides,,," but science does not have two sides. As Lawrence Krauss states, ",,,most often, one side is wrong." Creationism is not science, never has been never will be, a point strongly upheld in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005) trial:
"In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents."
What many seem to ignore when considering this issue, creationism/ID is an alternative religious explanation NOT an alternative scientific explanation. There is no way to teach creationism from a scientifically objective perspective without pointing out that the actual scientific evidence thoroughly disproves it. It was a point that was made clear in the landmark 1987 case Edwards v. Aguillard:
",,,the teaching of 'creation-science' and 'creationism,' as contemplated by the statute, involves teaching 'tailored to the principles' of a particular religious sect or group of sects,,,[t]he court found that the Louisiana Legislature's actual intent was "to discredit evolution by counterbalancing its teaching at every turn with the teaching of creationism, a religious belief." Ibid. Because the Creationism Act was thus a law furthering a particular religious belief,,,,"
In its simplicity what Chief Justice, William Rehnquist was stating, teaching creationism in public schools is unconstitutional because it attempts to advance a particular religion. It is science versus theology, which brings to bare a point I alluded to in the opening, whose theology are we going to teach?
__________
All four Republican lieutenant governor hopefuls have embraced the teaching of creationism in public schools.
Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, Sen. Dan Patrick, Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson and Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples said in the first televised debate of the campaign Thursday night that they favor teaching that there are flaws in the theory that humans evolved from lower life forms.
Late last month, state Board of Education members adopted new high school science books that include full coverage of evolution without the disclaimers sought by social conservatives and other critics of Charles Darwin’s theory.
While none of the lieutenant governor candidates mentioned the board’s decision, three — Patrick, Patterson and Staples — blasted teaching only evolution as a form of “political correctness.” They linked it to what they described as a broader moral decline.
“The breakup of the family in this country has started when we took God out of the classroom,” said Patrick, a radio talk show host.
GOP lieutenant governor hopefuls back creationism | Dallas Morning News
No comments:
Post a Comment