Here we go again....
A bit of a kerfluffle erupted last week when it came out that the Texas Education Agency's director of science was forced to resign amid accusations because she wasn't "neutral" enough on the topic of the teaching of evolution.
From today's New York Times article:
Sigh. You'd think, perhaps, people might have learned a few things since Dover was thrust onto the international stage and Judge John E. Jones III ruled that intelligent design wasn't science.
By the way, who was giving this oh-so-controversial talk about evolution and creationism? None other than Barbara Forrest, the expert witness in the Dover trial whose damning testimony exposed intelligent design's creationist links.
Remember? Cdesign proponentists? Maybe they can't get PBS in Texas.
Lauri in York
From today's New York Times article:
Ms. Comer, 56, of Austin, is out of a job, after forwarding an e-mail message on a talk about evolution and creationism — 'a subject on which the agency must remain neutral," according to a dismissal letter last month that accused her of various instances of 'misconduct and insubordination' and of siding against creationism and the doctrine that life is the product of 'intelligent design.'
Sigh. You'd think, perhaps, people might have learned a few things since Dover was thrust onto the international stage and Judge John E. Jones III ruled that intelligent design wasn't science.
By the way, who was giving this oh-so-controversial talk about evolution and creationism? None other than Barbara Forrest, the expert witness in the Dover trial whose damning testimony exposed intelligent design's creationist links.
Remember? Cdesign proponentists? Maybe they can't get PBS in Texas.
Lauri in York
Labels: Dover, intelligent design
posted by ACLU of Pennsylvania at 12/03/2007 02:16:00 PM
3 Comments:
Why in the world would anybody assert that a state's Education Administration should "remain nuetral" on a policy debate regarding education?
"Remaining nuetral" must be right up there with "remaining ignorant" as a religious right educational goal!
They're just trying to be like our mainstream media, who always ensure that both sides of an issue are given equal treatment, even for issues which have only one - or more than two - sides.
The biggest problem is that people don't seem to realize that creationism ISN'T "the other side."
As the Dover trial proved, Intelligent Design IS creationism, which makes it religion, which doesn't belong in a science class.
But the supporters of ID STILL look at it as an alternative to evolution.
This is why we have to stay vigilant, because ignorance never goes away. And if we don't pay attention, it will make its what into our classrooms in some way.
Post a Comment
<< Home