December 21, 2006
Williams College Prof. Mark Taylor has another facet to the question of whether we teach about religion in schools, in an opposite-editorial page article in the December 21 New York Times titled “The Devoted Student” (subscription required after December 28, 2006). Taylor wrote:
Today, professors invite harassment or worse by including “unacceptable” books on their syllabuses or by studying religious ideas and practices in ways deemed improper by religiously correct students.
Distinguished scholars at several major universities in the United States have been condemned, even subjected to death threats, for proposing psychological, sociological or anthropological interpretations of religious texts in their classes and published writings. In the most egregious cases, defenders of the faith insist that only true believers are qualified to teach their religious tradition.
This contrasts interestingly, and vexingly, with trends like the Texas high schools who teach the Bible as history, many of whom probably cross the line into advocacy for religion according to one study.
So, on one hand we get religious fanatics who want the Bible taught as a faith document in high schools. On the other hand, the students at whom those classes are aimed want it taught only one way, their way, when they get it. There is no thought of actually learning beyond what the fanatics want to learn.
Alan Bloom was wrong: THIS is the closing of the American mind.
Taylor ends his piece with a warning:
Until recently, many influential analysts argued that religion, a vestige of an earlier stage of human development, would wither away as people became more sophisticated and rational. Obviously, things have not turned out that way. Indeed, the 21st century will be dominated by religion in ways that were inconceivable just a few years ago. Religious conflict will be less a matter of struggles between belief and unbelief than of clashes between believers who make room for doubt and those who do not.
The warning signs are clear: unless we establish a genuine dialogue within and among all kinds of belief, ranging from religious fundamentalism to secular dogmatism, the conflicts of the future will probably be even more deadly.
Case in point: This discussion at Pharyngula.
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
5 Comments | 
Curricula, First Amendment, Religious Freedom, Texas, Texas Freedom Network | 
Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
December 3, 2006
Conservative, sometimes-rational commentator Dennis Prager is in a dudgeon because someone suggested that our first Muslim Member of Congress might take his oath of office on the Qur’an, rather than a Bible. Prager’s irrational rant demands that Congressmen Keith Ellison of Minnesota be stripped of his religious freedom (really — go see). He claims, using bogus history, that swearing without a Bible would be a first. That’s dead wrong.
Then-State Rep. Keith Ellison speaks at a Macalester College seminar on environmental justice and human rights, in February 2006. On November 7, Ellison was elected to represent Minnesota in the U.S. Congress, the first Muslim to be elected. Photo from Macalester College, American Studies Department.
Prager claims in his bio to have done graduate study. Would it be too much to expect him to understand the U.S. Constitution?
First, the U.S. Constitution prevents anyone from requiring any official elected to federal, state or local office, from having to take any oath on any religious book. Really. It’s in Article VI: Read the rest of this entry »
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
14 Comments | Accuracy, Bogus history, Current History, First Amendment, Freedom - Political, Religious Freedom, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
October 29, 2006
2006 is the 100th anniversary of the Mont Blanc company, the company that made fountain pens a luxury item even while fountain pens were still the state of the art of pens.
Today is the 61st anniversary (according to CBS “Sunday Morning”) or 62nd anniversary (see Wikipedia) of the introduction of the ballpoint pen in the U.S., at Gimbel’s Department Store, in New York City. It was based on a design devised in 1938 by a journalist named László Bíró. Biro produced his pen in Europe, and then in Argentina. But in the U.S., a businessman named Reynolds set up the Reynolds International Pen Company and rushed to market in the U.S. a pen based on several Biros he had purchased in Buenos Aires.
On October 29, 1945 (or 1946), you could purchase a “Reynolds Rocket” at Gimbel’s for $12.50 — about $130 today, adjusted for inflation.
Today I continue my search for a ballpoint or rollerball that will write in green, reliably. I use a Waterman Phileas ballpoint, a Cross Radiance fountain pen, a Cross Radiance rollerball (Radiance was discontinued about a year ago), a full set of Cross Century writing implements, a lot of Sanford Uniballs in various colors, and a lot of Pentel Hybrid K-178 gel-rollers, and some Pilot G-2 gel pens (though the green ink versions are unreliable). I also keep several Marvy calligraphic pens for signing things with a flourish. I have a box of $0.10 ballpoints in a briefcase for students who fail to bring a writing utensil.
Jefferson probably wrote the Declaration of Independence with quills he trimmed himself. Lincoln probably used a form of fountain pen to write the Gettysburg Address, but he had no writing utensil with him when he was assassinated at Ford’s Theatre on April 14, 1865. President Johnson made famous the practice of using many pens to sign important documents, such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964; he made gifts of the pens to people who supported the legislation and worked to get it made into law.
And who said it? (Brace yourself)
Beneath the rule of men entirely great,
The pen is mightier than the sword.
Edward Bulwer-Lytton, Baron Lytton, in Richelieu, act II, scene ii, a play he wrote in 1839. Yes, he is the same Bulwer-Lytton who wrote the novel Paul Clifford in 1840, whose opening line is, “It was a dark and stormy night.”
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
1 Comment | First Amendment, History, Technology | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
October 1, 2006
Conservatives complain constantly that “mainstream media” (or “MSM” as it is usually abbreviated in right-wing blogs, derisively) are biased to the left. That’s much contrary to my experience, as a reporter, as a PR flack, and as a consumer of news.
I do expect a striving for balance, however. So I was surprised to find, in an on-line test of American history and government at the site of Newsweek Magazine, that conservative misinformation about religious freedom had crept into “MSM.” A poster, Bernarda, pointed to the poll in comments to an earlier post.
When I saw this question, I rather expected Newsweek might have made the turn to the right — but I answered as the law is anyway. As you can see from what I copied off the answer screen, below, Newsweek’s poll said the legal answer is wrong:
| |
2. The idea that in America there should be a “wall of separation” between church and state appears in:
|
|
| |
The Constitution is not correct.
Thomas Jefferson’s letters
—Percentage of seniors who scored correctly: 27.2 percent
|
The idea that there should be a wall of separation between church and state was rather carefully and ambitiously developed in law by George Mason, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in Virginia, starting in 1776 with the Virginia Bill of Rights, and perhaps climaxing in 1786 when Madison engineered the passage of Jefferson’s Statute for Religious Freedom (one of the three things Jefferson thought noteworthy for his tombstone, above even his two-terms as president), and continuing through the adoption of the Bill of Rights. Read the rest of this entry »
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
2 Comments | 1776, America's founding, First Amendment, History Revisionism, Religious Freedom, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
September 30, 2006
Difficulties of getting flag etiquette right are demonstrated by this photo, which right now graces the website of the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia:
It’s a photo of two people looking over a field. It’s a photo by Jonathan Hyman, copyright 2003. If I had to guess, I’d guess it is the field in Pennsylvania where United Flight 93 crashed on September 11, 2001. In this cropped version, you can see that the man is wearing a jacket with the U.S. flag emblazoned on the back. In other versions (which I could not get to copy), you can see the woman is wearing an identical flag on the back of her coat.
The Constitution Center’s use of this photo implies that they find it intrigueing, if not an outright display of patriotic citizenship worthy to commemorate those who died on the attacks on the United States. The photograph promotes a display of the work of Jonathan Hyman:
To commemorate the fifth anniversary of 9/11, the National Constitution Center presents an exhibition of original photographs by Jonathan Hyman, documenting how the American people responded to and remember the events of September 11th.
Few events in American history have elicited the outpouring of public displays of emotion provoked by the September 11th attacks. Over the past five years, photographer Jonathan Hyman has traveled the country photographing the roadside displays, murals, and personal memorials created by Americans in response to September 11th. Hyman’s photographs of this new American folk-art pay tribute to those who died and movingly depict a country coming to grips with a national tragedy.
The selection of 100 photographs featured in the exhibit inspires conversations about community, national identity, and how ordinary Americans have commemorated the day. From images of urban murals, flag-painted houses, memorials, and signs to tattoos and decorated cars and trucks, the photographs show America’s sorrow, patriotism, anger, and in some cases, calls for revenge, peace and hope, or justice.
Sponsors of the exhibit include a major network television outlet, and police and fire fighter groups who wish to honor sacrifices by Americans:
9/11: A Nation Remembers is proudly supported by the City of Philadelphia Police and Fire Departments.
CBS 3 is the official media partner for the 9/11: A Nation Remembers exhibition.
Wearing flags on the backs of the jackets is a violation of the U.S. flag code. Were we to amend the Constitution to make flag desecration a crime, this physical desecration could (in a fit of stupidity) lead to the arrest of these two patriots, and probably to the arrest of the webmaster and photographer.
We don’t need an amendment to protect this flag from physical desecration. Citizens have already hallowed it far above our poor ability to add or detract. What we need is a law that authorizes the popular display of the flag, as people actually display it. We could use a law that would protect citizens in their display of the flag — a law rather like the one we have, called the First Amendment.
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
Leave a Comment » | Dissent, First Amendment, Flag etiquette, Freedom - Political, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
September 30, 2006
Update: You probably ought to read Coturnix’s views at Blog Around the Clock, “We are now officially living in a dictatorship.” God willing, he is not correct.
My first observation: Fox reporter Chris Wallace asked a question proposed by a listener in e-mail — probably hoping to embarrass Bill Clinton. Clinton took the question knew exactly what it was intended to do, and delivered a Philippic* on how Clinton worked to get Osama bin Laden before September 2001, that rather stunned people used to Democrats rolling over and letting half-truths win. It was front page in the Dallas Morning News (the Associated Press story, with a photo), and the talk of the internet.
Second observation: Clinton’s interview prompted this, a letter from a mother who lost her daughter on September 11, 2001. It turns out not all of the survivors of the victims of the initial attack think the current administration handled things well, either before or after the attack, and it appears there may be a minor flood of complaints from this quarter.
Third observation: Historians familiar with the Alien and Sedition Acts and their effects on America (prompting the ouster of John Adams from office, making him the first one-term president) couldn’t help but wonder when Congress last week approved bills to authorize activities in capturing and detaining prisoners from the campaign against terrorism. These activities previously ruled been ruled unAmerican by the Supreme Court — or unconstitutional, at least.
Are we at a tipping point now? Has public opinion made a turn that will be a topic for future history tests, on the war against terror and the Bush administration? (Malcolm Gladwell, what do you say?)
This morning’s e-mail brought this, an obituary for America, by Larry Butts:
An Obituary by Larry Butts
America (1776 – 2006)
America, often referred to by her nickname “Land of the Free,” was killed today in Washington, DC, by a drunk driver. The driver has been identified only as Commander in Chief. She had been ill recently. Read the rest of this entry »
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
7 Comments | Bill of Rights, Current History, Dissent, First Amendment, Freedom - Political, Iraq | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
September 17, 2006
First page of the Constitution of the United States of America, image from the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
On September 17, 1787, delegates to the Philadelphia convention met at Independence Hall to sign the document they had labored all summer to produce, to send it to the Continental Congress to be sent to the states for ratification. Ultimately 39 of the delegates would sign it.
We celebrate Constitution Day annually on September 17 in honor of this event (September 18 this year, because the 17th is a Sunday).
Texas requires all students to get a dose of Constitution (and Declaration of Independence) in social studies classes, each year — Freedom Week*. For that matter, there is a federal requirement, too (it would be fun to analyze whether such a requirement runs afoul of the law that requires the federal government to stay out of curricula, sometime). Where to find materials?
The Bill of Rights Institute has wonderful stuff — posters, videos, lesson plans. Much of what a teacher needs for Constitution Day is available for free on their website page for Constitution Day. I had the great good fortune to attend a week-long institute put together by this group, at Mt. Vernon, Virginia. Their scholarship is top notch; their materials are well researched, keyed well to the various age groups, and packaged to make their use easy. The Bill of Rights on Demand feature is good for quick lesson plans, too.
Here is one of my favorite sources: Prof. Gordon Lloyd of Pepperdine University created an interactive version of Howard Chandler Christy’s famous painting of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention. If you can project from your computer, you can show students the history — roll your mouse across the painting, and you get the name of the delegate with a link to get more history on that man.
The National Archives has lesson plans for Constitution Day, to get students to study and understand the Constitution and other contemporary documents directly.
This site, Constitution Day, makes me nervous. Yes, they have Colin Powell leading the nation in the Preamble this year — but they also highlight former Alabama Judge Roy Moore, who has little understanding or respect for the Constitution and Bill of Rights, in my opinion. Still, I haven’t found much other stuff that is objectionable, though I have a sneaking suspicion it’s there somewhere (they have car flags for sale, for example — they display of which is a violation of the flag code — but I digress). The authors appear to be well-intentioned, if less informed than I prefer.
Texas’ Region XIII Education Service Center features several lesson plans and other materials, keyed more to Texas but probably suitable for use in other states, too. Read the rest of this entry »
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
1 Comment | 1789, Curricula, First Amendment, James Madison, Lesson plans, TAKS, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
September 16, 2006
If you’re interested only in history and education, and if you think there is no overlap between the people who try to censor biology textbooks and those who try to “reform” history books, you may go to the next post and skip this one.
Quote accuracy is a big deal to me. When creationists can’t look you square in the eye and tell the truth about what another human being said, they lose my confidence, and their arguments lose credence. I think all scholars and policy discussants have an obligation to readers, policy makers, and the future, to try to get right quotations of famous people. I think this responsbility is particularly important in health and science issues. It was in the vein of checking out the accuracy and veracity of quotes from creationist publications some (okay — many) years ago for a minor issue Congress was dealing with that I discovered the depths of depravity to which creationists stoop to try to make their case that creationism is science and should be taught in public school science classes — or that evolution is evil, and shouldn’t be taught at all. Famous writings of great men like Charles Darwin regularly undergo a savage editor’s knife to make it appear he wrote things quite contrary to what he wrote with regard to science and evolution, or to make it appear that Darwin was a cruel or evil man — of which he was quite the opposite.
With the great benefit of having the Library of Congress across the street, I would occasionally track down obscure sources of “quotes” from scientists, only to discover in almost every case where creationists claimed science was evil, or wrong, that the creationist tracts had grotesquely distorted the text they cited. It was as if the creationist authors had been infected with a virus that made them utterly incapable of telling the truth on certain things.
Over the years I have observed that dedicated creationists tend to lose the ability to tell when they have stepped over the line in editing a quotation, and have instead changed the meaning of a quotation to fit their own ends. This the inherent dishonesty of creationism. It affects — it infects — almost all creationists to one degree or another. Many creationists seem to be under the influence of a virus that renders them incapable of telling a straight story about science, or Darwin.
I ran into a raging case recently. It would be amusing if not for the fact that the creationist seems to be an otherwise rational person.
Read the rest of this entry »
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
13 Comments | Accuracy, Bad Quotes, Charles Darwin, Creationism, Darwin, Ethics, Evolution, First Amendment, Hoaxes, Intelligent Design, Public education, Religious Freedom, Science and faith | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
September 15, 2006
Last year the Texas Freedom Network (TFN) published a revealing study showing that most curricula for Bible study in public schools promote Christian faith more than they study the Bible. The study was done by a witty and amusing professor of religion from Southern Methodist University, Dr. Mark Chancey.
This week they followed up that study with a detailed look at Bible studies courses in Texas public schools, as they are actually presented to students. It’s not pretty.
In their press release, TFN said:
Clergy, Parents Voice Concerns About Public School Bible Classes
New Report Reveals Poor Quality, Bias, Religious Agendas in Texas Courses
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 13, 2006
AUSTIN – Clergy and parents are voicing serious concerns that Bible classes in Texas public schools are of poor quality and promote religious views that discriminate against children from a variety of faith backgrounds.
“The study of the Bible deserves the same respect as the study of Huck Finn, Shakespeare and the Constitution,” said the Rev. Dr. Roger Paynter, pastor of First Baptist Church of Austin. “But in some public schools, Bible courses are being used to promote an agenda rather than to enrich the education of our schoolchildren.”
Dr. Chancey is a solid scholar of the Bible. His criticisms are detailed and often understated, in a business where criticism is generally more hyperbole than substance. Especially if you live in Texas, you should read the report.
In the original study, Chancey noted that some nationally-promoted curricula for Bible studies had plagiarized some of their most important materials, in one case including the entire section on honesty as defined by the Ten Commandments. Dr. Chancey does not write drily — he really does a great job turning words. Both studies are well worth the reading.
First Amendment charlatans are fond of quoting the Supreme Court’s decisions in school-and-religion cases since World War II, in which the Court urges critical studies of scripture, saying such studies are legal and good. Then the charlatans go on to advocate Bible studies that are devotional, confusing a Sunday school class-style of scripture study with the critical literature study the Court actually urged. These reports leave little room for squirming by those advocates.
Last time around, TFN held a meeting here in Dallas featuring Dr. Chancey talking about the report and the reaction to it from the religious right (they were stunned into saying many really stupid things). It was a fun night, and I hope TFN will do it again.
Other coverage of the report:
If you see a particularly good story on the study, will you please send me a link?
Patriots and Christians don’t let children take crappy Bible studies courses:
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
81 Comments | Creationism, Curricula, Education, Education quality, First Amendment, Plagiarism, Public education, Religious Freedom, Texas, Texas Freedom Network, Textbook Selection | Tagged: Creationism, Curricula, Education, Education quality, First Amendment, Plagiarism, Public education, Religious Freedom, Texas, Texas Freedom Network, Textbook Selection | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
September 9, 2006
Noting only that there is a vicious fight going on below the waterline at the moment, below the fold I offer two press releases about recent California legislation boosting pre-school programs for at-risk kids. Without my telling you, and without the numbers on the bills being the same, would you know these people are talking about the same bill?
Please, offer your own opinions in comments.
Read the rest of this entry »
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
5 Comments | Current History, Curricula, Education spending, First Amendment, Freedom - Political, Homeschooling, Public education, School vouchers | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
August 31, 2006
Santayana’s warning to the ill-educated rests, sometimes uneasily, at the opening of this blog — a warning to get history, and get history right.
Presidents in sticky situations have occasionally suggested their domestic critics were less than patriotic. Some claim the current administration has made this a standard claim against almost all criticism of foreign policy. In speeches to the American Legion meeting in Salt Lake City, Utah, both Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and President George Bush criticized their critics. (Here’s the transcript of Rumsfeld’s remarks, from Stars & Stripes; here is the transcript of Bush’s remarks from Salt Lake City’s Deseret News.)
Here are Rumsfeld’s words that sent so many to their history books; Rumsfeld said:
It was a time when a certain amount of cynicism and moral confusion set in among Western democracies. When those who warned about a coming crisis, the rise of fascism and nazism, they were ridiculed or ignored. Indeed, in the decades before World War II, a great many argued that the fascist threat was exaggerated or that it was someone else’s problem. Some nations tried to negotiate a separate peace, even as the enemy made its deadly ambitions crystal clear. It was, as Winston Churchill observed, a bit like feeding a crocodile, hoping it would eat you last.
There was a strange innocence about the world. Someone recently recalled one U.S. senator’s reaction in September of 1939 upon hearing that Hitler had invaded Poland to start World War II. He exclaimed:
“Lord, if only I had talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided!”
I recount that history because once again we face similar challenges in efforts to confront the rising threat of a new type of fascism. Today — another enemy, a different kind of enemy — has made clear its intentions with attacks in places like New York and Washington, D.C., Bali, London, Madrid, Moscow and so many other places. But some seem not to have learned history’s lessons.
(Someone has already wondered whether Rumsfeld got the quote right, and to what senator it might be blamed; Idaho’s Sen. William Borah is the likely candidate, according to The American Prospect.)
Rumsfeld’s example should get your blood heated up, if not boiling. Problem is, according to Keith Olberman, part of the example should cut against Rumsfeld: It was Neville Chamberlain’s government who criticized Winston Churchill as being in error. Had the government only listened to the dissenters, many lives might have been saved, the war shortened, etc., etc. Olberman’s opinion is worth reading through to the end, and it’s available at Crooks and Liars.
Sometimes it’s necessary to know more than the history; it’s necessary to know literature, too. “Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!” wrote Sir Walter Scott.
Tip o’ the old scrub brush to Pharyngula.
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
Leave a Comment » | Current History, Dissent, First Amendment, Freedom - Political, Good Quotes, History Revisionism, Patriotism, Winston Churchill | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
August 26, 2006
Update, August 28: Interesting discussion at The Education Wonks.
The 7th grade world geography teacher in Lakewood, Colorado, Eric Hamlin, reached a compromise agreement with the school district over the display of foreign flags in his classroom, according to a couple of reports I heard last night after I posted on the controversy. The World, a co-production of BBC, Public Radio International and WGBH in Boston, carried a thorough report, in audio.
But then he decided to resign from the school anyway, according to Matthew Rothschild at the online Progressive. Denver Post columnist Jim Spencer added a few details, including the very temporary way the flags were mounted (the Colorado law bans “permanent” displays). Lots of comments, including the text of the law, at Reason.com’s Hit and Run. (I have the complete text of the law below the fold.)
It would be difficult to write parody like this. Read the rest of this entry »
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
3 Comments | Current History, First Amendment, Flag etiquette, Freedom - Political, Geography - Political, History, Pedagogy, Public education, School discipline | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
August 18, 2006
Althouse tees off on the content and tone of an article in the New York Times that describes a school in the United States where young boys spend nine hours a day in rote memorization of the Qur’an.
During my law school time our informal study group had one guy who could study the tarnation out of any topic we had. Tom got his high school education in a Catholic system, and he had four years of Latin. It wasn’t exactly rote memorization, but it was a lot of work dealing with a system of writing that is difficult to master, at best, and language-logic defying at worst. In the group, we determined (over a few fermented grain beverages) that this experience had well prepared Tom to deal with the oddities of legal thought. Of course, it may have been just that Tom had learned to study with all those stern taskmasters who taught the Latin courses.
Readers here know I think school should grab a student’s interest whenever possible to improve the educational value of any topic offered. Rote memorization has a place — I required history kids to memorize the Gettysburg Address and the Preamble to the Constitution last year — but it is a place in a larger menu of educational offerings.
Howard Gardner claims there are different domains of genius available to everybody. Of the eight (maybe nine) domains he has identified, how many of them are neglected by pure, rote memorization of an untranslated text?
Ann Althouse is right. One question we need to consider is, how many others were outraged by that article in the Times, and for the right reasons?
Update: P. Z. Myers also found the article’s description of the school troubling. He gets a lot more traffic than I do — a lot more comments are available there, at Pharyngula, “This is not a school.”
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
Leave a Comment » | Curricula, Education, First Amendment, Pedagogy, Religious Freedom, Teaching | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
August 14, 2006
I’ll make this quick (back to the grindstone, you know).
In my immediately previous post I make a minor case that advocacy of intelligent design is the less preferable alternative to understanding evolution, for moral reasons. Advocacy of intelligent design has so farproven incapable of making a case in a straightforward and honest fashion. All cases for intelligent design rest in large part, or completely, in distortions of science and history. What originall caught my eye and my ire was the mischaracterization of the recent decision in the Pennsylvania intelligent design case. Read the rest of this entry »
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
8 Comments | Accuracy, Creationism, Current History, Curricula, Education, Evolution, First Amendment, Intelligent Design, Law, Public education, Religious Freedom | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
August 14, 2006
I’m straying only a bit off topic, and only by certain legalistic interpretations. History folks, bear with me.
My complaint about what is called “intelligent design” in biology is the same complaint I have against people who wish to crown Millard Fillmore as a great light for bringing plumbing to the White House over the complaints of health officials — that is, my complaint against those who push H. L. Mencken’s hoax over the facts.
Joe Carter at Evangelical Outpost listed at great lengths his list of reasons that arguing for science actually promotes intelligent design instead (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3). This blog’s response was in two parts, one and two. Other people offered other rebuttals, including notably, P. Z. Myers at Pharyngula, a very good blog that features the hard science of biology and especially evolution.
Joe provided a first affirmative rebuttal here. This post is my reply, on the single point of whether it’s fair to say creationists, IDists, or others who twist the facts and research, are “dishonest.”
The text is below the fold; I left it in remarks at Evangelical Outpost. I have one other observation I’ll make quickly in the next post.
Enjoy, and chime in with your own remarks (I’m headed back to the grindstone). Read the rest of this entry »
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
23 Comments | Creationism, Current History, Curricula, Education, Evolution, First Amendment, Intelligent Design, Public education, Religious Freedom, Science | Tagged: Creationism, Current History, Curricula, Darwin, Education, Evolution, First Amendment, Intelligent Design, Joe Carter, Religious Freedom, Science, Voodoo science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Millard Fillmore's Bathtub 