ACLU sues over Evolution in Textbooks.

[Martin]

Link


I agree with the ACLU here. There are very few laws in science and its mostly theories, yet the disclaimer doesnt explain that all theories arent fact, it singles out evolution?

If the concerned parents wanted to put a bigger disclaimer defining in detail what a theory is and saying that ALL theories aren't fact, then that'd be much more reasonable.

Though, "higher intelligence" should not be taught in public schools.

 

[Legendary]

And so the argument between creationism and evolution begins...

For the record I'm in favor of the ACLU on this one. All or nothing.

 

[diskop]

"It singles out evolution from all the scientific theories out there," Selman said. "Why single out evolution? It has to be coming from a religious basis, and that violates the separation of church and state."

I don't see how that is

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: diskop

"It singles out evolution from all the scientific theories out there," Selman said. "Why single out evolution? It has to be coming from a religious basis, and that violates the separation of church and state."

I don't see how that is

so why evolution only then?

 

[UglyCasanova]

Originally posted by: diskop

"It singles out evolution from all the scientific theories out there," Selman said. "Why single out evolution? It has to be coming from a religious basis, and that violates the separation of church and state."

I don't see how that is

What do you mean? Why?

 

[diskop]

Originally posted by: dparker

Originally posted by: diskop

"It singles out evolution from all the scientific theories out there," Selman said. "Why single out evolution? It has to be coming from a religious basis, and that violates the separation of church and state."

I don't see how that is

What do you mean? Why?

I mean, how is that a violation of church and state? By teaching evolution I mean.

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: diskop

"It singles out evolution from all the scientific theories out there," Selman said. "Why single out evolution? It has to be coming from a religious basis, and that violates the separation of church and state."

I don't see how that is

I certainly agree its coming from a religious basis. Not sure how you can reasonably deny that. Whether it violations the seperation of church and state, I think is another issue. Dont know which way I'd go on it but it was a local, voter initiated program. This doesn't directly harm anyone and I think its good to have local involvement in school policy instead of federal beaurocratic crap.

 

[mithrandir2001]

The board adopted the labels, which say: "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered."

Yup, let's get this lawsuit going. These religious freaks just won't quit.

 

[UglyCasanova]

You missed the point. It's not the teaching of evolution that is a violation, it is that the school's placed warnings in the books saying that evolution is only a theory ect. The fact that they singled out evolution out of all of the theories in science has to be based on religion. That is where the violation of Church and State.

 

[Lucky]

. The fact that they singled out evolution out of all of the theories in science has to be based on religion. That is where the violation of Church and State.

I'm not so sure it is.

(although for the record I oppose these stickers)

 

[Jzero]

Good God. We have to put warning labels on textbooks now to appease the PC crowd?! I guess it's too much of so-called "educators" to accurately teach their pupils the scientific meanings of words like "theory" and "law" and to educate them on both concepts?

 

[Turin39789]

it is harming the childrens possibilities of being respected scientists. The local voters should not be setting educational and scientific policy. Schools teach science, science is not dictated by a vote

 

[QueHuong]

Ohio is considering state science requirements that would allow teaching of alternatives, including intelligent design.

NOOOOooooooo

 

[UglyCasanova]

Originally posted by: Lucky

. The fact that they singled out evolution out of all of the theories in science has to be based on religion. That is where the violation of Church and State.

I'm not so sure it is.

(although for the record I oppose these stickers)

Explain. You may well be right, I'm just curious as to your logic. If something is passed under religious influence, for religious purposes, that is a violation IMO. It's just like that stupid law we have here where you can't sell alchohol on Sundays. Wtf is the point to this law? How can anyone argue that it wasn't passed for religious purposes? Like it was posted above, I'm glad the community is getting more involved with the education of their children, but not this way unfortunately .

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: Turin39789
it is harming the childrens possibilities of being respected scientists. The local voters should not be setting educational and scientific policy. Schools teach science, science is not dictated by a vote

wtf? how are they being harmed? explain that in a little more detail please. Again, I'm against the stickers personally but I'm not convinced its unconstitutional. The science is not being changed and there is no curriculum being introduced.

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: dparker

Originally posted by: Lucky

. The fact that they singled out evolution out of all of the theories in science has to be based on religion. That is where the violation of Church and State.

I'm not so sure it is.

(although for the record I oppose these stickers)

Explain. You may well be right, I'm just curious as to your logic. If something is passed under religious influence, for religious purposes, that is a violation IMO. It's just like that stupid law we have here where you can't sell alchohol on Sundays. Wtf is the point to this law? How can anyone argue that it wasn't passed for religious purposes? Like it was posted above, I'm glad the community is getting more involved with the education of their children, but not this way unfortunately .

My logic is that if you are going to invoke "seperation of church and state" then it needs to be clearly defined as such. We have taken the constitution too liberally before and it doesn't need to be worsened. It reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."" and if you are going to invoke that against this school district then I'm not personally convinced it falls within that scope.

Edit: and I agree it certainly is religiously motivated...but can you PROVE that? In a court of law?

 

[CocaCola5]

I would think its not a bad idea to atleast teach the difference between theory and fact...

 

[UglyCasanova]

Originally posted by: CocaCola5
I would think its not a bad idea to atleast teach the difference between theory and fact...

As they should, but we all know that the reasoning behind the stickers aren't to educate the students on the difference between theory and fact.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: dparker

Originally posted by: CocaCola5
I would think its not a bad idea to atleast teach the difference between theory and fact...

As they should, but we all know that the reasoning behind the stickers aren't to educate the students on the difference between theory and fact.

I don't think the stickers were a good idea. Again, religiously motivated.

I think an opening statement when discussing evolution, basically along the lines of "At this time, scientific observation supports Darwinian evolution as the scientifically accurate process by which our animal kingdom came to be. This is a theory, not a fact, and can be disproven (if evidence is provided to the contrary)."

 

[Emma]

I don't see the bible having any disclaimer stickers on it.

 

[Martin]

bump

 

[ChrisIsBored]

Originally posted by: Emma
I don't see the bible having any disclaimer stickers on it.

It should... they have girls making love to their fathers in there! :Q

 

[308nato]

Originally posted by: mithrandir2001

The board adopted the labels, which say: "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered."

Yup, let's get this lawsuit going. These religious freaks just won't quit.

I don't know what's more annoying, a religious "freak" as you call them or non-religion freaks.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

If we are mandated to drop evolution, there's a LOT of other stuff we're going to have to drop. Such as Plate Techtonics, dinosaurs (accd. to creationism, they didn't really exist when we said they exist), and pre-history in general.

Scientific theory is based on OBSERVATIONS and experiments, that is what makes it different from religion. If a scientific theory is wrong, and proven wrong, science will change. Science used to teach that the world is flat. It was proven wrong, it's no longer taught that way. Science used to teach that the sun moved around the earth, that one changed as well. Science used to teach that there were two different distinct types of organisms, plants and animals. You'll notice that there's 5 groups now.

Science is often updated, religion is rarely updated. (when was the last addition to the bible?) While I don't believe that religion should be banned, I see no reason why modern scientific theories cannot be taught. If evolution is proven wrong, that can be changed.

 

[diskop]

Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
If we are mandated to drop evolution, there's a LOT of other stuff we're going to have to drop. Such as Plate Techtonics, dinosaurs (accd. to creationism, they didn't really exist when we said they exist), and pre-history in general.

Scientific theory is based on OBSERVATIONS and experiments, that is what makes it different from religion. If a scientific theory is wrong, and proven wrong, science will change. Science used to teach that the world is flat. It was proven wrong, it's no longer taught that way. Science used to teach that the sun moved around the earth, that one changed as well. Science used to teach that there were two different distinct types of organisms, plants and animals. You'll notice that there's 5 groups now.

Science is often updated, religion is rarely updated. (when was the last addition to the bible?) While I don't believe that religion should be banned, I see no reason why modern scientific theories cannot be taught. If evolution is proven wrong, that can be changed.