That’s right, we don’t want our kids exposed to people in our public schools who don’t believe exactly as we do. Heaven forbid they learn anything about Islam except fear and hatred.
So when a Tennessee teacher gives a lecture explaining that evolution by natural selection is an extremely well established explanation of our observations, and that there is very little disagreement within the scientific community about the theory in the larger sense, do you think the legislature is likely to look upon this happily?
Or better yet, the teacher decides, “You know what? That phrase about ‘weaknesses of existing scientific theories’ means I don’t have to teach anything at all about intelligent design because it’s not a scientific theory.” Will they give him a pat on the back for that?
Pull the other one. This sort of nonsense is always about trying to discredit evolution and science in general. Why? I guess because there aren’t enough stereotypes about southern morons being anti-science and anti-education.
OK, so let me modify what I’ve said. It’s a badly written law in that it includes “human cloning” in the list. There’s no theory of human cloning and, thus, there’s no way to review the weaknesses of it.
Other than that, I don’t have a problem. The law (as I see it) is not asking for alternative, non-scientifically valid theories to be taught. It’s not asking for weaknesses to be presented based upon no evidence. It asks “students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories”
You may be wary of this because it was passed by people with a stupid agenda. And you’d probably be right to be wary. But look at it again, just as the law is written. This is exactly what real scientists do all the time. You would never have a modification of a scientific theory if you couldn’t objectively analyze current theory and probe for its weaknesses.
Yes, sounds reasonable doesn’t it? However what the law really does is set the state up for another Scopes trial. The purpose is to allow teachers (or other students) to teach against evolution or other “controversial” science topics. Evolution Debate Bill is Religion Poorly Disguised:
I hear many petitions to the Lord start off with a prayer.
As for the lecture, her note that it was something more than a regular lecture (this was supposed to be a debate) suggests more than one speaker and the blessing was part of the overall programme.
