Kentucky Republicans Complain About Teaching Evolution

[IhartU]

 

Kentucky Republicans Complain About Teaching Evolution

August 17, 2012

By Stephen D. Foster Jr.

Evolution has been a favorite target of conservative Republicans for a very long time now. In the last few years alone, Republicans have made every effort to push for teaching the Biblical story of creation in science classrooms in states such as Louisiana, Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Indiana, and elsewhere. Republicans in Kentucky, apparently feeling left out, are now jumping into the fray to fight against real science as well.

The Lexington Herald-Ledger reports that several Republican lawmakers raised the issue of teaching evolution and testing students knowledge of it on the ACT standardized test during a meeting of the Committee on Education.

State senator David Givens was the first to chime in on the topic, announcing to those in attendance that he wants creationism taught in science class. “I would hope that creationism is presented as a theory in the classroom, in a science classroom, alongside evolution,” Givens said.

State Representative Ben Waite went even further than his colleague, calling for an end to teaching evolutionary theory entirely. Why you ask? Because according to Waite, evolution is totally “made up” and isn’t based on real science.

“The theory of evolution is a theory, and essentially the theory of evolution is not science — Darwin made it up,” Waite declared. “My objection is they should ensure whatever scientific material is being put forth as a standard should at least stand up to scientific method. Under the most rudimentary, basic scientific examination, the theory of evolution has never stood up to scientific scrutiny.”

As you can imagine, this didn’t sit too well with the academic community, which fervently defended evolution. Professor Vincent Cassone is the chair of the biology department at the University of Kentucky and he made perhaps the best defense of evolution when asked about the issue by the Herald-Ledger.

“The theory of evolution is the fundamental backbone of all biological research,” Cassone said. “There is more evidence for evolution than there is for the theory of gravity, than the idea that things are made up of atoms, or Einstein’s theory of relativity. It is the finest scientific theory ever devised.”

The Biblical story of creation is not supported by scientific evidence, but merely by sheer faith alone, which is perfectly fine if you value religion and attend church. But creationism is a religious doctrine that has no place in science class. These Republicans claim that teaching evolution to students is a way to indoctrinate them, but it seems lost to them that forcing students to learn Christian doctrine, whether they are Christian or not, is the true definition of indoctrination. Evolution has been proven time and time again as a valid biological process. But one political party in this country has taken it upon itself to decry fact, knowledge, and science and have called for replacing these things with religion. It’s bad enough American science students are already struggling to compete with the rest of the world. Adding religious doctrine that has no place in education to the science curricula would only signal our total surrender.

[LindaClement]

Same for me: tact is for people who don't want the truth. You don't want honesty, don't ask my opinion.

I recently ran across a blog that really nailed it, vis a vis 'belief' being respectable, which explained it something like this:

It isn't respectable to make a claim that you have determined to never question this (belief) or think about it again; I don't have to respect that choice, nor the object of that choice. 'Because it's a belief' is, in fact, probably the least respectable justification for unexamined or odious thinking.

Quoting IhartU:

 

Quoting ButterMeUp:

Quoting IhartU:

 

Quoting ButterMeUp:

Quoting IhartU:

 

Quoting ButterMeUp:

For these people their beliefs trump al science. For some science is simply a test divulged by the devil and allowed by god. Some of them will NEVER agree with evolution no matter how much they study up on it. I do know many Christians in particular who understand evolution but simply disagree. For them their faith tells them it is merit less. We both may disagree but we have no right to tell them what their belief is stupid and their feelings are not worth acknowledging. I think a compromise should be made and that's the only one I can see working IMO. 

 Well, people who believe this way have absolutely zero interest in education, knowledge and truth and since a school is just the place for that, perhaps they should 'teach' their children at home where they can fill their heads with insane mythological nonsense and leave the the real learning to those who want it.

This is where our conversation ends. Please do not disrespect ANY idea, group, or belief other's hold close to their hearts. It's very offencive and hurtful. 

  Sorry but I can't respect religion and I don't have to. It's my opinion- which I am totally free to express. I find religion repulsive, negative and a plague on mankind that has caused nothing but damage and continues to. It's an archaic man-made tool of explanation,  and the fact that so many people hold onto it while ignoring scientific facts and common sense and use it to control, manipulate and kill proves how unnecessary it really is. If people had as much faith, love and trust in themselves as they place in their 'god', the world would be better off  IMO.

 

 

You lack tact, but that's okay it's just not important to everyone. However, I can imagine you have difficulty in personal relationships. 

 I lack tact because I don't tip toe around those I 'might' offend with my personal opinions about religion? So what. I refuse to respect something I find repulsive and dangerous. I respect your right to believe in religion but I sure don't have to respect religion itself or the fact that you find it 'truth'.

As for personal relationships: people come to me when they need to hear the truth because they know I'm honest and tell it like it is. I don't do it to be mean, I do it because I CARE.

Are you one of those people who only surrounds themselves with those of like mind who tell you only what you want to hear or need to 'break it to you gently' because they are too concerned with your feelings?

[LindaClement]

I'm with you: I believe that the definition of 'compromise' is a 'solution everyone hates.'

I don't believe that compromise is a high enough standard for anything, in fact, it's a concession to hopelessness and permanent division. Almost 'since you can't make everyone equally happy, at least make them equally miserable.'

There is no compromise in 'acknowledging' creationism in a science classroom --or at least no more of a 'compromise' than acknowledging White Supremacy (as the belief that many hold in high esteem) in Chemistry class, or Cooking.

It's unrelated to science. It isn't science. It doesn't pass the first simple test to qualify as science.

It isn't going to start being science until, and unless, it is evaluated by the Scientific Method. Which it's not allowed to be, because it's sacrosanct, unassailable, beyond all critical thinking and it's probably evil or sinful to even suggest it.

If someone wants to cram creationism into public school, they're going to have to put it into the class it belongs in: history, or philosophy or religion or mythology, or possibly even literature. It isn't science.

Quoting romalove:

 

Quoting ButterMeUp:

Quoting romalove:

 

Quoting ButterMeUp:

So a simple acknowledgement is out of the question as well?

Let's agree to disagree. Have a nice day. 

Quoting romalove:

 

 

 You said that creationism should be brought up in the science class as a possible theory.

If the teacher is bringing it up as a possible theory, how in your world does that not mean she's teaching it?

SMH

When did I ever say that? I said there should be a disclaimer and that's all Ive ever said. Teaching and bringing something up/acknowledging are two different things. Teaching implies something is being learned.

If you'll note my example in my OP of my personal experience in school, I said my teacher brought to light that other's do believe differently and that it was our job to decide how we felt. He didn't teach anything or even bother explaining the beliefs. He just acknowledged them and moved on. I agree with how he handled it. I just think he started the process of thinking in my mind. I remember spending that afternoon at the school library looking up evolution. That's when I came to my personal beliefs about evolution.

I don't think there is anything wrong with acknowledgment of any topic. It gets the juices flowin. School is way too structured. Students are forced fed information instead of using their minds to actually develop theories and ideas. Maybe we would be smarter as a nation if we stopped swallowing everything we are fed and demand actual discussions and having our minds engaged. 

 From your very first post on this thread:

I agree with creationism being brought up as a possible theory. I think it's wrong to no include at least a tiny excerpt of creationism. I'm not saying a while day of class needs to be spent on it but it would be nice if creationism could at least be acknowledged as a possible theory.

That's where I got it from, lol.

Now, as to the rest of this response.  Children go to school to be taught.  One of the things they are taught is how to reason through things, but they are also taught things that are factual.  They expect teachers to be "fact experts" and tell them things that are true and real.  If science teachers teach a bunch of different things regarding creation and evolution, and expect kids to sort them out, that would be ridiculous, firstly because it would give, in the children's minds, equal weight to creationism (which is NOT SCIENCE) and evolutionary theory (which is SCIENCE), and second, because it would be telling children that we don't really know what's going on in that regard, when we do.

Because not everyone "accepts" science doesn't mean actual science should be taught.

 LMAO

Yes, a simple acknowledgment is out of the question.  Why?

1.  Creationism isn't science

2.  Creationism isn't the only non-science creation theory and you can't teach them all

3.  It would confuse kids to hear many theories, science and non-science both, in the same classroom

4.  IT IS ILLEGAL TO TEACH CREATIONISM

5.  Creationism isn't science.  I know I said that already but apparently no matter how many times I say it, people want it.

Acknowledgment is NOT teaching. What would you be learning by stating some people do believe that a god or supernatural being/event aided evolution or animals and plants as we know them today. There is no evidence to disprove it yet so it is their job to decide how they feel and what they believe. 

Nothing is learned from that. You acknowledge that some  people do wholeheartedly disagree with evolution (should appeases creationists) without diving into something that is deemed non related to actual science class. The students would still learn evolution and only evolution and be able to meet standards. 

I assumed this would be a welcomed compromise. Both groups are wasting time and tax money that actual classrooms could use arguing over this nonsense when a simple compromise should be easy to make. COMPROMISE!

 It's a horrible compromise.  You are actually saying that teachers should tell their students that what they are about to teach is not accepted by everyone.  What kind of message is that?  Furthermore, the non-acceptance isn't based on scientific merit, but because of religious disagreement.  This has nothing to do with science. 

The only people wasting time and money are those who insist that it's in the best interests of students in public school science classrooms to be taught anything other than actual science.

We don't compromise on these sorts of standards, nor should we.  And, we shouldn't be seeking to appease people when it comes to something like this.  Those who refuse to acknowledge what science is, and wish their children not to learn it, can homeschool or private school or publicly school but tell their children they personally want them to know what they themselves believe.

[ButterMeUp]

Quoting IhartU:

 

Quoting ButterMeUp:

Quoting IhartU:

 

Quoting ButterMeUp:

Quoting IhartU:

 

Quoting ButterMeUp:

For these people their beliefs trump al science. For some science is simply a test divulged by the devil and allowed by god. Some of them will NEVER agree with evolution no matter how much they study up on it. I do know many Christians in particular who understand evolution but simply disagree. For them their faith tells them it is merit less. We both may disagree but we have no right to tell them what their belief is stupid and their feelings are not worth acknowledging. I think a compromise should be made and that's the only one I can see working IMO. 

 Well, people who believe this way have absolutely zero interest in education, knowledge and truth and since a school is just the place for that, perhaps they should 'teach' their children at home where they can fill their heads with insane mythological nonsense and leave the the real learning to those who want it.

This is where our conversation ends. Please do not disrespect ANY idea, group, or belief other's hold close to their hearts. It's very offencive and hurtful. 

  Sorry but I can't respect religion and I don't have to. It's my opinion- which I am totally free to express. I find religion repulsive, negative and a plague on mankind that has caused nothing but damage and continues to. It's an archaic man-made tool of explanation,  and the fact that so many people hold onto it while ignoring scientific facts and common sense and use it to control, manipulate and kill proves how unnecessary it really is. If people had as much faith, love and trust in themselves as they place in their 'god', the world would be better off  IMO.

 

 

You lack tact, but that's okay it's just not important to everyone. However, I can imagine you have difficulty in personal relationships. 

 I lack tact because I don't tip toe around those I 'might' offend with my personal opinions about religion? So what. I refuse to respect something I find repulsive and dangerous. I respect your right to believe in religion but I sure don't have to respect religion itself or the fact that you find it 'truth'.

As for personal relationships: people come to me when they need to hear the truth because they know I'm honest and tell it like it is. I don't do it to be mean, I do it because I CARE.

Are you one of those people who only surrounds themselves with those of like mind who tell you only what you want to hear or need to 'break it to you gently' because they are too concerned with your feelings?

You don't have to respect ANY idea but you should at least care enough for another's feelings to consider how and what you say. Sometimes we think things we just shouldn't say. 

For example. If I was to walk up two a group of atheists and their children and insult them/their ideas. Let's say I took it a step further and began insulting the children and screaming they would go to hell. Even if their children do not believe in hell, it's still upsetting for young children. I don't have the right to be hurtful to anyone just because I may disagree. If they believe in atheism, that is their choice. They have every right to stand up and be proud of their views but I do not have the right to be an asshole. I would never do something like that. If I can't disagree with someone without getting rude or belligerent, I agree to disagree before I get hurtful. I don't always need to voice my opinions if I know they will be very hurtful. I consider others.

I don't surround myself with rude people. In fact that's a house rule of mine. If you can't be nice, you leave my home and never return.