UPDATE::Kansas State Board of Education defends science standards as 'performance expectations' | CJOnline.com

"Morality is doing right, no matter what you are told.
Religion is doing what you are told, no matter what is right."
~ H.L. Mencken

These people are nucking futs:

The Complaint alleges that the Policy explicitly and implicitly seeks to establish a non-theistic religious worldview by leading students to ask “ultimate religious questions” like “where do we come from?” Rather than objectively informing children of the actual state of our scientific knowledge about these questions in an age-appropriate manner, the F&S lead them “to answer the questions with only materialistic/atheistic answers.” This and numerous other deceptive strategies alleged in the Complaint amount to a prescription for indoctrinating student acceptance of a materialistic/atheistic worldview by the time they reach middle school.

The Complaint alleges that the principal tool of indoctrination is the concealed use of an Orthodoxy known as methodological naturalism or scientific materialism. It holds that explanations of the cause and nature of natural phenomena may only use natural, material or mechanistic causes, and must assume that supernatural and teleological or design conceptions of nature are invalid.

"Supernatural and teleological or design conceptions of nature are invalid" for a reason, they cant be tested.  this group doesn't even understand what science is nor have even the most basic grasp on the scientific method but yet they want to dictate the standards by which science is taught.

Kansas education officials deny standards they adopted for teaching of science in public schools endorse what critics say is a “a non-theistic religious Worldview.”

The Kansas State Board of Education stated its position Monday in arguments submitted to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver.

The arguments are in response to an appeal by critics of a document the board adopted in 2013. The opponents contend the document violates the religious rights of students, parents and taxpayers, and is unconstitutional.

The document treats evolution and climate change as key scientific concepts for classes from kindergarten through 12th grade, The Associated Press reported when the controversy arose.

Opponents who sued to overturn what they characterized as a “teaching plan” include an organization known as Citizens for Objective Public Education (COPE).

As I stated in my original post concerning COPE, "Creationism is not scientifically valid, it’s a religious story that has zero evidence to support it,,,.  [I]t is a point made very clear by Justice Jones in Kitzmiller v Dover (2005)."

Even if these "educational standards" were to be adopted across this country, these kids would never be able to compete on an international level.  It is akin to child abuse to so stunt their future prospects in the name of religion; these kids deserve better.

What COPE is saying, their faith is fragile and they don't want anyone to be exposed to critical thought or the scientific method.  They're not content to condemn their own children to ignorance, tthey want to do this to everybody's kids.  This flap concerning the Next Generation Science Standard is just one means of creating an opportunity to indoctrinate impressionable children they might not otherwise be able to reach with their own religious belief system. 

So, let me get this straight. Every time the public school science curriculum properly refuses to teach creationism, it is guilty of teaching a religious world view? That makes no sense. Evolution is a well-established explanation in the scientific community. Teaching it in science class is not teaching a religious view in violation of church-state separation.

It sounds like proponents would prefer teaching no science at all? Should we just throw up our hands and say, to every question, “we don’t know?” Will that be the science education of the 21st Century if arguments like this one prevail?

Kansas State Board of Education defends science standards as 'performance expectations' | CJOnline.com