The McCain-Obama sex education for kindergartners flap doesn’t seem to be going away. Despite the best efforts of the traditional news media to deny reality, the facts have been trickling out thanks primarily to alternative media outlets like National Review Online (here and here), The Weekly Standard, and Rush Limbaugh. But there is a whole lot more to this story that hasn’t been widely reported yet—and it needs to be. As I documented in chapters 12 and 13 of my book Darwin Day in America, there is a growing movement in the United States to provide explicit sex education to very young children. It’s a movement that thoughtful parents have every right to be disturbed about. What is scandalous is the way “mainstream” reporters are doing their best to …
Academic freedom doesn’t protect a professor’s right to talk about the scientific evidence favoring intelligent design. But it does protect a professor’s right to belittle his students’ fundamentalist religious beliefs. That’s the hypocritical view being championed by Des Moines Register columnist Rekha Basu. Unfortunately, her mindset reflects the views of a lot of pro-Darwin apologists in the media. When astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez was being harassed and discriminated against at Iowa State University (ISU) because of his support for intelligent design, Basu actually cheered on the inquisitors. When atheist religion professor Hector Avalos spearheaded a campus petition against intelligent design in 2005, for example, Basu wrote that “it would …
Click here to listen. Next time someone tells you intelligent design is “based on religion,” you might point him to American Founder Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence. As I explain in a special July 4th edition of ID the Future, Jefferson not only believed in intelligent design, he insisted it was based on the plain evidence of nature, not religion. Ironically, the critics of intelligent design often think they are defending the principles of Jefferson. The National Council for the Social Studies, for example, claims that intelligent design is religion and then cites Jefferson’s famous Letter to the Danbury Baptists calling for a “wall of separation” between church and state. The clear implication is that Thomas Jefferson …
The following information was suppressed by Louisiana Advocate reporter Will Sentell in his story titled “La. alone with controversial science law.” Contrary to Sentell’s report, Louisiana is definitely not alone in promoting the critical analysis of evolution. This background information was sent to Mr. Sentell after he interviewed Casey Luskin of Discovery Institute and before he filed his article. But he apparently didn’t want to let the facts get in the way of his story: STATE AND LOCAL POLICIES SUPPORTING CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF EVOLUTION As of 2008, eight states have adopted statewide laws or science standards that (1) encourage or require critical analysis of evolution or (2) protect the freedom of teachers to present scientific criticisms of …
Self-described atheist writer Jason Streitfeld is calling on his fellow atheists to endorse the Louisiana Science Education Act, which would support teachers who want to promote critical thinking on evolution and other science issues. “The bill is good. The bill is right. The bill should be embraced by atheists and scientists throughout the world,” writes Streitfeld in The American Chronicle. He says that the current approach to science education in America isn’t working, and we need to try something new: The way public schools in America teach science simply isn’t working. Students don’t learn how exciting and dynamic scientific discovery can be. Instead, they memorize (or, at least, they try to memorize) dry facts and formulas. Rarely do they engage in …
After all of the harrumphing by Darwinists that the Louisiana Science Education Act (LSEA) promotes “creationism” and is therefore unconstitutional, the director of the Louisiana ACLU has now conceded that the bill is actually fine as written according to a Louisiana TV station: ACLU Executive Director Marjorie Esman said that if the Act is utilized as written, it should be fine…. Of course, Ms. Esman goes on to fret that some people might misuse the bill, and in that case the ACLU might sue. Well, I have news for Ms. Esman: Any law can be disregarded, and so yes, if a teacher wants to willfully ignore what the Louisiana Science Education Act says and try to endorse religion, the teacher no doubt can do so (until the ACLU comes knocking at the door). But in such …
By a unanimous vote of 36-0, Louisiana’s state Senate has just approved the Louisiana Science Education Act, which seeks to protect the right of teachers and local school districts to encourage “critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.” Because the bill passed the Louisiana House last week by a vote of 94-3, the bill now goes to Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal for his signature. Be prepared for an onslaught of misinformation about the act, most notably the false claim that the act permits the use of “religious” materials in science classes. Read the bill for yourself here, especially …
The Chicken Littles at Americans United for Separation of Church and State are now running around warning that The Louisiana House of Representatives … approved a measure that opens the door to teaching creationism in public schools… Well, no, it didn’t. The proposed Louisiana law expressly states in Section 1C that it “shall not be construed to promote any religious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs, or promote discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion.” Americans United conveniently neglects to mention that section of the bill. If any school districts or teachers try to use the bill to promote creationism or other religious views, they will be violating the law itself. Any …
On Wednesday, the Louisiana House of Representatives passed the Louisiana Science Education Act, which now goes to the state Senate for final approval. Critics are already in overdrive trying to misrepresent the proposed law. Here is a quick guide to the facts. What would the Louisiana Science Education Act actually do? Two main things: Upon the request of a local school board, the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education would be required to “allow and assist teachers, principals, and other school administrators to create and foster an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied including, but not limited to, evolution, …
The Louisiana House of Representatives just approved the Louisiana Science Education Act by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 94-3. The bill previously passed the Louisiana Senate by a vote of 35-0. Because there was a minor amendment to the bill in the House, the bill now goes back to the Senate for its concurrence, but the original author of the bill (Senator Nevers) has indicated his support for the slightly amended version, and so Senate concurrence is likely. The Louisiana Science Education Act is designed to safeguard the right of Louisiana teachers “to create and foster an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied including, …
The AP is reporting here about Louisiana’s passage of the Science Education Act. Here is the text of the Act as it passed the Louisiana House of Representatives today: AN ACT To enact R.S. 17:285.1, relative to curriculum and instruction; to provide relative to the teaching of scientific subjects in public elementary and secondary schools; to promote students’ critical thinking skills and open discussion of scientific theories; to provide relative to support and guidance for teachers; to provide relative to textbooks and instructional materials; to provide for rules and regulations; to provide for effectiveness; and to provide for related matters. Be it enacted by the Legislature of Louisiana: Section 1. R.S. 17:285.1 is hereby enacted to read as …
The first Associated Press story is out about the passage of the Louisiana Science Education Act by Louisiana’s House of Representatives, and I’m pleased to say that it supplies an accurate description of the arguments both for and against the bill. That may not seem like a big deal, but when it comes to major media coverage of the evolution issue, it is. The beginning of the story states: BATON ROUGE, La. (AP) — A proposal that would let science teachers change how they teach topics like evolution, cloning and global warming in public schools was overwhelmingly approved Wednesday by the Louisiana House. The bill by Sen. Ben Nevers, D-Bogalusa, would let teachers supplement school science textbooks with other materials. The House voted 94-3 for the …
Over the weekend, the New York Times editorial page showed yet again how pro-Darwin ideology trumps the facts when it comes to the major media’s coverage of the evolution debate. On Saturday, the Times’ editorial page warned readers ominously: The Texas State Board of Education is again considering a science curriculum that teaches the “strengths and weaknesses” of evolution, setting an example that several other states are likely to follow. The Times apparently hasn’t been paying attention to Texas during the past decade, because (as we pointed out last week) the “strengths and weaknesses” language the Times’ editorialists so fear has been part of the Texas science standards since at least 1998! In short, the Texas State Board of …
As previously pointed out, the New York Times botched its recent story about the science standards debate in Texas, implying that support for covering the “strengths and weaknesses” of evolution is supposedly a new strategy on the part of Darwin critics. The only problem is that the “strengths and weaknesses” language in the Texas science standards was already included some 10 years ago in 1998 when the existing science standards were adopted, and so there is nothing new about it. (Indeed, the language itself derives from the 1980s, before the current sciences standards.) More importantly, the debate over whether to teach both the strengths and weaknesses of Darwinian evolution has been going on across the nation for the past decade. Now, however, New …
Last week, I talked at length with a Washington Post editorial writer named Jo-Ann Armao. Ms. Armao said she was working on a possible editorial about the academic freedom bills on evolution currently being considered by legislatures of various states. I gave Ms. Armao a lengthy interview, providing a lot of background information and correcting various errors that have appeared in news coverage of the bills. The Post has now published its editorial on the topic, and it’s now evident that Ms. Armao simply didn’t care about facts. Ms. Armao had her spin, and even though the facts didn’t substantiate it, she was going to stick to it. Predictably, the Post asserts that the academic freedom bills are about “inviting creationism back into the classroom.” …
Richard Dawkins just can’t seem to keep his foot out of his mouth. He has spent the last several weeks trying to recover from his embarrassing interview in the film Expelled where he concedes that intelligent design is a scientific hypothesis after all — so long as you limit the intelligence being studied to space aliens. Now, after denouncing Expelled as “wicked, evil” and an “outrage” for pointing out that Darwinism was one of the intellectual influences on Nazism, Dawkins has compared a popular Rabbi who dares to criticize him to Hitler! And he did it no less on World Holocaust Remembrance Day. No, I’m not joking. As I’ve said before, it’s getting really hard to parody the Darwinists. They do it so well …
Today’s Wall Street Journal is running an article about the growing battle over academic freedom on evolution. For the establishment media, the article is pretty standard-issue — which means it’s fairly shallow, conflates lots of things, and is written almost entirely from the Darwinists’ point of view. But the fact that the Journal is highlighting this issue at all shows how the academic freedom issue may be reaching a level that is hard to ignore. A couple of the specific problems of the Journal piece: In the article proper, the reporter doesn’t allow us to respond to the phony claim that there are no scientific criticisms of Darwinism, although we were allowed to briefly make our points in an internet-only graphic (to which the National Center for Science …
Well, it’s official. The Florida House of Representatives refused today to pass the academic freedom measure on evolution previously passed by the state Senate, and so the measure is now dead because the legislative session has ended. Supposedly, the Florida House refused to pass the Senate bill because it favored a stronger measure to require the critical analysis of evolution. As a former political science professor, I can tell you that this explanation doesn’t hold water. If the Republican House leadership in Florida really supported academic freedom on evolution, they would have passed the Senate bill. Instead, they shamefully passed a bill earlier this week with language that the Senate had previously rejected, knowing full well this would likely mean the death of any …
Florida citizens who support academic freedom legislation on evolution might want to ask some tough questions of House Republican leaders in their state. Rather than pass an academic freedom bill previously adopted by the state Senate, the Florida House earlier this week adopted its own seemingly tougher measure that would actually require critical analysis of evolution. But wait: the Florida Senate had previously rejected the House approach, and with only a week left in the legislative session, Florida House members had to know that it would be extremely difficult to hammer out a new bill that could pass both houses within the remaining time. If the Florida legislature adjourns without passing an evolution academic freedom bill — after both legislative chambers previously approved …
The Missouri House of Representatives’ Committee on Elementary and Secondary Education just approved a proposed academic freedom act on evolution by a bipartisan vote of 8-3. The bill now moves to the full House for consideration. Sponsored by Rep. Wayne Cooper, the bill reads in part: The state board of education, public elementary and secondary school governing authorities, superintendents of schools, school system administrators, and public elementary and secondary school principals and administrators shall endeavor to create an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that encourages students to explore scientific questions, learn about scientific evidence, develop critical thinking skills, and respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of …