No need to apologize for a hijack, LastCall–since evolution (and the teaching thereof) is one of the issues that bothers Rep. Davis so much, it’s certainly a relevant topic. What bugs me about Davis, however, isn’t her stance on evolution, per se, but on how she wants to restrict or distort high school students’ understanding of it and other issues.
I’d agree that evolution, or, more precisely, the process of evolution, is a topic that the scientific community should continue to discuss and analyze. The debate, however, isn’t over whether or not evolution occured–the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that it did–it’s over the mechanism(s) by which it occured.
On the other hand, when Davis calls for textbooks containing “alternative” theories to evolution, she’s not interested in debating the mechanics of evolution–she wants to advocate a pseudo-scientific creationism in its place. There are no valid alternative theories to evolution; creationism is not a scientific theory, and therefore has no place in a scientific textbook.
To require high school science textbooks to include discussions of creationism (since that really is the only “alternative” that Davis is possibly thinking of) is ridiculous–it’s like requiring geology classes to discuss “Flat-Earth” theories. It’s an insidious method by which an issue of religious faith is being injected into public education.
The same goes for “abstinence-only” sex education. Only an idiot would insist that condom usage is not substantially safer than sex without a condom. Nobody’s saying that condoms are perfect, but any reputable health specialist would agree that condoms, when used properly, are very effective barriers against pregnancy and most sexually-transmitted diseases.
To deprive teenagers of this knowledge is, to my mind, grossly irresponsible. Most teenagers are eventually going to have sexual relations at some point in their lives, and they should have access to information that will help them protect themselves and their future partners.
In Davis’s bizarro-world, teenagers would naturally repress their sexual instincts in order to save themselves for marriage; any teaching of sex education and contraceptives will encourage teenagers to experiment with sex and thus tear asunder our social fabric.
That is absolute bullshit. That’s not the world we live in today, and it never was. It’s incredibly naive to think that teenagers will not one day engage in sex outside the bonds of matrimony. While students should understand that abstinence is the only 100% guarantee against pregnancy and STDs, and that condoms are not perfect, to insist that only abstinence should be taught is folly. I believe that school officials have a social obligation to provide their students with information that will have an impact on their health–students should be provided with an education that ensures they understand their bodies and the risks that they face as they mature into adults.
The attempt to restrict sex education to “abstinence-only” is simply another attempt to foist a religiously-based morality onto the public school system.
People like Davis won’t be happy until schools have mandatory prayer services (Christian, of course), and that all classroom discussions are filtered through a Christian (and particularly fundamentalist) perspective. They actually have much more in common with the 9/11 hijackers than the liberals she accuses of “hijacking” this country–the foundations of which, I might add, owe more to Deists and atheists than to fundamentalist Christians.
By the way, I don’t mean to disparage religious fundamentalists, though I profoundly disagree with them–they have every right to hold their beliefs. What provokes me are people like Davis, who want to impose those beliefs on everyone else. Their attempts to take over school boards and to enact ridiculous legislation that would restrict public education deeply trouble me.