Apparently, the Texas Board of education hasn’t learned the lessons of court battles throughout the southern states and wants to include creationism as part of the science curriculum in their schools.
In a speech delivered to the conservative pro-family group Texas Eagle Forum last week, newly appointed chair Barbara Cargill (R-Woodlands) questioned the faith of her fellow board members, saying that she was one of only “six true conservative Christians on the board,”…
As a proponent of reintroducing the “strengths and weaknesses” of evolution into science textbooks, Cargill helped nominate an out-of-state intelligent design creationist to the science standards review panel in 2009
While Democrats Lawrence Allen, Mary Helen Berlanga, Mavis Knight and moderate Republicans Bob Craig and Pat Hardy voted against reintroducing the “strengths and weaknesses” language, the social conservative bloc, like the board chair, voted for diluting textbooks’ focus on evolution.
For assistance, they called on creationism/intelligent design proponents such as Stephen Meyer of the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based anti-evolution group. Now the same group hopes to insert its position into supplemental materials, sending a 71-page report to board members that argues the proposed instructional materials are not critical enough of evolution.
Teaching young students ‘flaws’ in any theory may be one method to encourage them to a career in that field and fine tuning the theory to clean it up. The goal here is to undermine one of the most well established concepts that exists in science today. It would perhaps be different if discussion would be held about the strengths and weaknesses of theories of gravity vs relativity, string theory, multiverse theory, or other more unsettled science. No, this is obviously a ploy by christians to insinuate their own non-scientific religious beliefs into schools.
Efforts such as these have been dismissed by numerous courts throughout the US, primarily on the simple fact that creationism and intelligent design are not science. Still the lesson has not been learned. The end result will be a combination of poor education and unwinnable lawsuits that will waste taxpayers money that could be used to actually increase the quality of education. So far, this is not, at least to my knowledge, been an issue in public schools in Canada. Let us hope it never does.
Doonesbury says it best: