You are currently browsing the AcademicFreedomBlog weblog archives for the day July 6, 2008.
- Culture & society (57)
- History (25)
- Notable Quotes (13)
- Personal story (9)
- Politics (23)
- Science and faith (72)
- Uncategorized (14)
- August 31, 2008: The momentum against logic and facts
- August 24, 2008: Orgnizations v. Organisms
- August 20, 2008: EPICENTER
- August 3, 2008: OF THE PRINCIPAL SOURCE OF BELIEF AMONG DEMOCRATIC NATIONS
- July 20, 2008: All Creatures Great & Small
- July 13, 2008: Television & Totalitarian Government
- July 6, 2008: A Needed Law
- June 29, 2008: Religous Arguments for Evolution
- June 23, 2008: Political incorrectness & HIV
- June 20, 2008: Prochlorococcus and the Origin of Life
Blogroll
Chat
Archive for July 6, 2008
A Needed Law
July 6, 2008 by Dr. Mc.
On July 1, with amazingly little press, Louisiana passed
the first-ever law to protect teachers who wish to add scientific criticism to a
curriculum that requires the teaching of evolution. It’s called the Louisiana
Science Education Act, and here is the full text.
Regardless of press acknowledgment, this is quite a
landmark, It passed by a large majority, but I personally have worked in one state for five years to
get a law with similar purpose
on the books, and many other states have attempted and failed.
That being the case, one might rightly ask, "If it’s so
hard to get passed, why did it pass with such a high vote?" In my experience a
bill with similar purpose passed every committee vote but one, and that was a
tie. It passes, because senators know that their constituencies would have them
vote for it, but the trick is that it seldom gets to the floor for a vote. If an
item is hotly divisive, even with majority support, legislators work hard behind
the scenes to keep it from coming to a vote. One or two people can lock down the
entire process. I have watched this process first hand, too many times.
Now that it’s passed, the local newspaper represented the passage as if Louisiana has gone out on a lonely limb, even though the paper had good information
to the contrary. Those who oppose it, bemoan it as "anti-evolution,"
even though it specifically states, "A teacher shall teach the material
presented in the standard textbook supplied by the school system and thereafter
may use supplemental textbooks and other instructional materials to help
students understand, analyze, critique, and review scientific theories in an
objective manner." Apparently they consider analysis after presentation to be
threatening. Threatening what?
In any case, this suppression of facts and distortion of
the law are perfect examples of why teachers in every state need protection if
they are to simply "analyze, critique, and review scientific theories in an
objective manner."
Posted in Politics, Science and faith | No Comments »