A different view of the California creationism in the classroom decision

May 10, 2009

Wired takes a different view of the California case in which an AP history teacher was found to have violated a student’s rights with comments about creationists — at least, different from the view I’ve articulated here.  It’s worth a look — and it shows that this case needs to be evaluated more carefully and closely.  Alexis Madrigal wrote at Wired’s website:

The teacher got into hot water because the creationism statement came outside the context of his AP European History class. In making the statement during a discussion of another teacher’s views on evolution, the court could not find any “legitimate secular purpose in [the] statement.”

However, Judge Selna found a second statement that Corbett made about creationism did not violate the student’s First Amendment rights, although it’s an equally pointed critique.

“Contrast that with creationists,” Corbett told his class. “They never try to disprove creationism. They’re all running around trying to prove it. That’s deduction. It’s not science. Scientifically, it’s nonsense.”

That statement was OK because it came in the context of a discussion of the history of ideas and religion. Thus, its primary purpose wasn’t just to express “affirmative disapproval” of religion, but rather to make the point that “generally accepted scientific principles do not logically lead to the theory of creationism.” One might expect that if creationism came up in the context of evolutionary biology, it would be similarly OK to say, “Scientifically, it’s nonsense.”

The nuanced decision prompted the judge to append an afterword. Selna explains his thinking a basic right is at issue, namely, “to be free of a government that directly expresses approval of religion.” Just as the government shouldn’t promote religion, he writes, the government shouldn’t actively disapprove of religion either.

It seems to me, still, that the instructor was well within legal bounds.  For example, we would not ask a biology instructor to pay deference to the Christian Science view that disease is caused by falling away from God (sin), and not by germs, and consequently that prayer is effective therapy.  As a pragmatic matter, Christian Scientists don’t demand that everybody else bow to their view; but in a legal suit, the evidence of Pasteur’s work and subsequent work on how microbes cause disease would trump any claim that Pasteur was “not religiously neutral.”

We still await word on whether the district and teacher will appeal the decision.

2 Comments | Creationism, Education, Evolution, First Amendment, Science, Separation of church and state, Teachers, Teaching | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

5th Circuit approves Texas “moment of silence” law

March 19, 2009

Any Texas student who had hoped to get out of the one-minute silence exercise suffered a defeat on St. Patrick’s Day.  A three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals sustained a Texas federal court’s ruling that the state-mandated moment of silence is legal.

Edith Brown Clement wrote the decision for the panel, in Croft vs. Texas (the link is to a .pdf of the decision).

David and Shannon Croft, as parents and next friends of their three minor children (collectively, the “Crofts”), bring suit against the governor of the state of Texas, Rick Perry (“Perry”), arguing that Texas Education Code § 25.082(d) is an unconstitutional establishment of religion. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Perry, holding that § 25.082(d) had a secular legislative purpose and was not an establishment of religion. For the following reasons, we affirm.

*     *     *     *     *     *

Conclusion

The Crofts have standing to challenge the 2003 Amendments. But the Amendments are constitutional and satisfy all three prongs of the Lemon analysis. There is no excessive entanglement, and the primary effect of the Amendments is not to advance religion. The most difficult prong—for this and for moment of silence statutes generally—is legislative purpose. But our review of legislative history is deferential, and such deference leads to an adequate secular purpose in this case. While we cannot allow a “sham” legislative purpose, we should generally defer to the stated legislative intent. Here, that intent was to promote patriotism and allow for a moment of quiet contemplation.  These are valid secular purposes, and are not outweighed by limited legislative history showing that some legislators may have been motivated by religion. Because the 2003 Amendments survive the Lemon test, they are not an unconstitutional establishment of religion, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED

We covered the original trial court decision here at the Bathtub.

Not much news coverage of the story, not so much as I would have thought (many Texas schools are on break this week).  No firm word on whether the Crofts will appeal further.  An Illinois case went the other way in January — enough conflict to get the Supreme Court involved?  Difficult to say.  The Illinois Legislature is working to undo the federal court decision, in Illinois.

Would it be a good case to cover in government?  What do you think?

What should the students meditate on?  A suggestion from the comments at the Dallas Morning News blogsite:

“May we please have a moment of science, for those poor souls that cannot understand evolution as God’s scientific method.”
Joseph Cassles

3 Comments | Bill of Rights, First Amendment, History, Jurisprudence, Justice, Law, Religion, School prayer, Separation of church and state, U.S. Constitution | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Texas legislators get the message: Creationism hurts science and jobs

February 14, 2009

On Darwin’s birthday, two Texas legislators wrote about the stakes in the tussle between creationists on the one side, and educators, scientists and economic development on the other, in the Houston Chronicle.

Somebody gets it!  Will Gov. Rick Perry and SBOE Chairman Don McLeroy get the message?  McLeroy was reappointed as chairman a week ago — but the appointment must be approved by the State Senate.  Is a fight possible?

State Board of Education must be held accountable

By STATE SEN. RODNEY ELLIS and STATE REP. PATRICK M. ROSE
Copyright 2009 Houston Chronicle

[Can a newspaper copyright the words of public servants doing their jobs?]

Feb. 12, 2009, 12:14AM

As scientists and educators across Texas and the nation mark the 200th birthday of Charles Darwin with calls for a renewed commitment to science education, the State Board of Education continues to engage in narrow theological debate about the validity of evolution. If Texas schoolchildren are to succeed in the 21st Century economy, the SBOE must focus less on internal philosophical differences and more on improving science instruction.

Last month, the board once again got bogged down in a bitter dispute over this issue. Members tentatively approved new science curriculum standards that protect teaching of evolution in one area, while creationists succeeded in watering it down elsewhere. Sadly, it was just the latest battle in the “culture war” being fought by a board that decides what more than 4.7 million Texas children learn in their public schools.

Families should be the primary educators on matters of faith, not our public schools. Regardless of board members’ personal beliefs on creationism and evolution, science classrooms are not the place for resolving such disagreements about faith. Those classrooms should focus on science.

Despite one’s personal stance on evolution, its teaching is critical to the study of all the biological sciences.

Scientists from our state’s universities have expressed this to the board, and have warned that watering down science education would undermine biotechnology, medical and other industries that are crucial to our state’s future.

Last session, the Legislature committed to investing $3 billion over the next 10 years in making Texas the global leader in cancer research and finding cures. This historic investment is certain to bring economic and academic opportunities to our state.

Sadly, even as our state takes one step forward, the SBOE moves us two steps back by continuing to support a diminished standard for science education. Texas’ credibility and its investment in research and technology are placed at risk by these ongoing, unproductive debates.

This is a critical issue and a critical time. Study after study has demonstrated that states which do well in science education have the brightest long-term economic future. According to Gov. Rick Perry’s Select Commission on Higher Education and Global Competitiveness, despite improved scores in math and reading, Texas’ students continue to lag alarmingly behind other states in science proficiency.

The National Assessment of Education Progress revealed that only 23 percent of Texas 8th graders achieved proficiency in science, compared with 41 percent of students in the top-performing states — the states with which we compete for jobs.

Yet the board continues to undermine high-quality science instruction, allowing our students to slip further behind.

To ensure that the SBOE works as it should, we have filed legislation to place the board under periodic review by the Sunset Advisory Commission and hold them accountable for their performance, just as we do the Texas Education Agency and other state agencies.

The decisions of the SBOE not only impact millions of young lives on a daily basis, but impact the economic progress of our state as well.

For these reasons and many others, the public has a right to full disclosure and oversight.

The board has escaped such scrutiny for far too long. The disregard for educators, instructional experts and scientists can’t continue. It’s time to take a closer look at the operations and policies of the State Board of Education.

Our state, and especially our kids, deserve better.

Ellis represents the Houston area and parts of Fort Bend County; Rose represents Blanco, Caldwell and Hays counties.

Thank you, Houston Chronicle.

Resources:

Leave a Comment » | Creationism, Education, Education reform, Evolution, Government, Intelligent Design, Religion, Science, Separation of church and state, State school boards, Texas, Texas Lege, Textbook Selection, Textbooks | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Rev. Sharon Watkins’ sermon: Feed the good wolf

January 21, 2009

Update: In comments, Mary points to this site at the National Cathedral, for full video of the service. Thank you, Mary!

Full text here.

And here:

Harmonies of Liberty
Isaiah 58:6‐12, Mt 22:6‐40
Rev. Dr. Sharon E. Watkins
National Prayer Service; January 21, 2009

Mr. President and Mrs. Obama, Mr. Vice President and Dr. Biden, and your families, what an inaugural celebration you have hosted! Train ride, opening concert, service to neighbor, dancing till dawn . . .

And yesterday . . . With your inauguration, Mr. President, the flame of America’s promise burns just a little brighter for every child of this land!

There is still a lot of work to do, and today the nation turns its full attention to that work. As we do, it is good that we pause to take a deep spiritual breath. It is good that we center for a moment.

What you are entering now, Mr. President and Mr. Vice President, will tend to draw you away from your ethical center. But we, the nation that you serve, need you to hold the ground of your deepest values, of our deepest values.

Beyond this moment of high hopes, we need you to stay focused on our shared hopes, so that
we can continue to hope, too.

We will follow your lead.

There is a story attributed to Cherokee wisdom:
One evening a grandfather was teaching his young grandson about the internal battle that each person faces.
“There are two wolves struggling inside each of us,” the old man said.
“One wolf is vengefulness, anger, resentment, self‐pity, fear . . .
“The other wolf is compassion, faithfulness, hope, truth, love . . .”
The grandson sat, thinking, then asked: “Which wolf wins, Grandfather?”
His grandfather replied, “The one you feed.”

There are crises banging on the door right now, pawing at us, trying to draw us off our ethical center – crises that tempt us to feed the wolf of vengefulness and fear.

We need you, Mr. President, to hold your ground. We need you, leaders of this nation, to stay centered on the values that have guided us in the past; values that empowered to move us through the perils of earlier times and can guide us now into a future of renewed promise.

We need you to feed the good wolf within you, to listen to the better angels of your nature, and by your example encourage us to do the same.

This is not a new word for a pastor to bring at such a moment. In the later chapters of Isaiah, in the 500’s BCE, the prophet speaks to the people. Back in the capital city after long years of exile, their joy should be great, but things aren’t working out just right. Their homecoming is more complicated than expected. Not everyone is watching their parade or dancing all night at their arrival.

They turn to God, “What’s going on here? We pray and we fast, but you do not bless us. We’re confused.”

Through the prophet, God answers, what fast? You fast only to quarrel and fight and strike with the fist. . .

Is not this the fast that I choose: to loose the bonds of injustice . . . to share your bread with the hungry, and bring the homeless poor into your house . .? Then your light shall break forth like the dawn, and your healing shall spring up quickly . . .

At our time of new beginning, focused on renewing America’s promise –yet at a time of great crisis – which fast do we choose? Which “wolf” do we feed? What of America’s promise do we honor?

Recently Muslim scholars from around the world released a document, known as “A Common Word Between Us.” It proposes a common basis for building a world at peace. That common basis? Love of God and love of neighbor! What we just read in the Gospel of Matthew!
So how do we go about loving God? Well, according to Isaiah, summed up by Jesus, affirmed by a worldwide community of Muslim scholars and many others, it is by facing hard times with a generous spirit: by reaching out toward each other rather than turning our backs on each other. As Mahatma Gandhi once said, “people can be so poor that the only way they see God is in a piece of bread.”

In the days immediately before us, there will be much to draw us away from the grand work of loving God and the hard work of loving neighbor. In crisis times, a basic instinct seeks to take us over – a fight/flight instinct that leans us toward the fearful wolf, orients us toward the self‐interested fast . . .

In international hard times, our instinct is to fight – to pick up the sword, to seek out enemies, to build walls against the other – and why not? They just might be out to get us. We’ve got plenty of evidence to that effect. Someone has to keep watch and be ready to defend, and Mr. President – Tag!  You’re it!

But on the way to those tough decisions, which American promises will frame those decisions?  Will you continue to reason from your ethical center, from the bedrock values of our best shared hopes?  Which wolf will you feed?

In financial hard times, our instinct is flight – to hunker down, to turn inward, to hoard what little we can get our hands on, to be fearful of others who may take the resources we need. In hard financial times, which fast do we choose? The fast that placates our hunkered‐down soul – or the fast that reaches out to our sister and our brother?

In times, such as these, we the people need you, the leaders of this nation, to be guided by the counsel that Isaiah gave so long ago, to work for the common good, for the public happiness, the wellbeing of the nation and the world, knowing that our individual wellbeing depends upon a world in which liberty and justice prevail.

This is the biblical way. It is also the American way – to believe in something bigger than ourselves, to reach out to neighbor to build communities of possibility, of liberty and justice for all. This is the center we can find again whenever we are pulled at and pawed at by the vengeful wolf, when we are tempted by the self‐interested fast.

America’s true character, the source of our national wisdom and strength, is rooted in a generous and hopeful spirit.

“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, . . .
Send these, the homeless, tempest‐tost to me,1

Emma Lazarus’ poetry is spelled out further by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr,: “As long as there is poverty in the world I can never be rich, even if I have a billion dollars. As long as diseases are rampant and millions of people in this world cannot expect to live more than twenty‐eight or thirty years, I can never be totally healthy . . . I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. This is the way our world is made.”2

You yourself, Mr. President, have already added to this call, “If there’s a child on the south side of Chicago who can’t read, that matters to me, even if it’s not my child. . . . It’s that fundamental belief — I am my brother’s keeper, I am my sister’s keeper — that makes this country work.”

It is right that college classes on political oratory already study your words . You, as our president, will set the tone for us. You will help us as a nation choose again and again which wolf to feed, which fast to choose, to love God by loving our neighbor.

We will follow your lead – and we will walk with you. And sometimes we will swirl in front of you, pulling you along.
At times like these – hard times –we find out what we’re made of. Is that blazing torch of liberty just for me? Or do we seek the “harmonies of liberty”, many voices joined together, many hands offering to care for neighbors far and near?

Though tempted to withdraw the offer, surely Lady Liberty can still raise that golden torch of generosity to the world. Even in these financial hard times, these times of international challenge, the words of Katherine Lee Bates describe a nation with more than enough to share:   “Oh, beautiful for spacious skies, for amber waves of grain, for purple mountain majesties above the fruited plain . . .”

A land of abundance guided by a God of abundance, generosity, and hope – This is our heritage. This is America’s promise which we fulfill when we reach out to each other.

Even in these hard times, rich or poor, we can reach out to our neighbor, including our global neighbor, in generous hospitality, building together communities of possibility and of hope. Even in these tough times, we can feed the good wolf, listen to the better angels of our nature. We can choose the fast of God’s desiring.

Even now in these hard times let us
Lift every voice and sing Till earth and heaven ring,
. . . with the harmonies of Liberty;

Even now let us Sing a song full of hope. . .

Especially now, from the center of our deepest shared values, let us pray, still in the words of James Weldon Johnson:

Thou who has by Thy might
Led us into the light,
Keep us . . . in the path, we pray.
Lest our feet stray from the places, our God, where we met Thee,
Lest, our hearts drunk with the wine of the world, we forget Thee;
Shadowed beneath Thy hand,
May we forever stand.
True to our God,
True to our native land.3

_________________________________

1 Emma Lazarus
2 The Words of MLK, Jr., selected by Coretta Scott King, 21
3 James Weldon Johnson

9 Comments | Barack Obama, Religion, Separation of church and state | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Disciples minister to preach National Prayer Service

January 18, 2009

This will make P.  Z. Myers shake his head — apologies, P. Z. — but those of us in the “mainstream,” or “liberal leaning” sect of the Disciples of Christ are quite happy that our general minister, Sharon Watkins, will preach the sermon at the National Prayer Service on Wednesday.

We’re such a politically polyglot group that we can be described as mainstream, liberal, or conservative with some accuracy.  Three presidents have Disciples roots — James Garfield, who was a Disciples minister before becoming president of a Disciples college in Ohio; Lyndon Johnson, who was a life-long Disciple, and who built a chapel on his ranch; and Ronald Reagan, whose mother was a devout Disciple, and who attended one of several Disciples affiliated colleges, Eureka College in Eureka, Illinois.

Watkins is the first woman to preach at this service in the history of the nation.

The National Prayer Service is one of those events that underscores the separation of church and state.  At the first Washington inaugural, it was held the same day as the ceremony, but after the official ceremony.  The attendees concluded the swearing in and other official ceremonies, then adjourned to a church a few blocks away for a sermon, those who wished to.

This year the sermon will be held in the National Cathedral, a majestic building which is actually an Episcopalian venue (where Woodrow Wilson and Helen Keller are interred), miles from the federal area at the National Mall, and a day after the inauguration.

But watch:  There will be a band of religious radicals, fanatics, who will claim that the mere existence of this service somehow nullifies the First Amendment, and suggests that the government has a religious bias.  Do not believe them.  You know the history, and you know better.  Our government has great tolerance for religious displays, but no tolerance for religious bias, in our government.

I’ve wondered sometimes what would happen were the three Disciples presidents to meet.  If Reagan and Johnson ever met, I have not found the record of it.  I wonder whether Johnson, Reagan and Garfield could have found between them some subject of common interest for talk of substance.  It’s difficult to imagine Reagan and Johnson finding much common ground, one who revered FDR and the New Deal, and the other who campaigned against the New Deal almost from the day FDR died.  And yet they shared concepts of faith, and they may have found there common ground on which to stand, and talk.

I marvel at a sect that embraces, and celebrates, such diversity.  We think it makes for healthier theology, healthier congregations, and a healthier nation.

We can hope.

Below is the press release from Disciples News Service, with details about the service and how to view it or listen to it.  There is also a plea for clips from local papers — maybe some of you could do a good turn and clip any article that appears in your local paper, with the date and page, and mail it in.  It’s for the archives, you know — history.

Disciples News Service

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

National Prayer Service Updates

January 17, 2009
Dear Disciples,
Earlier this week it was announced that Rev. Dr. Sharon Watkins will preach the sermon at the National Prayer Service in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday, Jan. 21. Her sermon will conclude Presidential Inauguration activities for our country’s forty-fourth President, Barack Obama. Dr. Watkins appreciates the outpouring of support, prayers and well wishes she has received from Disciples and ecumenical colleagues everywhere since the announcement.
“I am so grateful that Disciples have a role in this historic moment,” said Watkins. “I am depending on your prayers for God to use me to deliver an uplifting and appropriately challenging message to our new President, vice-President and all those who will attend the service.”
Watkins will be joined by a diverse group of religious leaders at the prayer service, which will take place at the National Cathedral, starting at 10 a.m. EST.
A press release listing those who will participate in the service was released yesterday afternoon and includes another Disciples pastor, Dr. Cynthia Hale, Senior Pastor of Ray of Hope Christian Church in Decatur, Ga. Hale will be among those reading scripture. To read the press release that announces participants at the service, please go to:
www.pic2009.org/pressroom/entry/presidential_inaugural_committee_
announces_participants_of_national_prayer_/

Many of you have asked about opportunities to view the program. Our office has just learned that the program will be webcast in two ways. One is through the National Cathedral website at: www.nationalcathedral.org. The other option is to go to the Presidential Inaugural Committee website at www.pic2009.org.
We’ve also had a number of phone calls regarding the availability of tickets for the prayer service. Unfortunately, we have not been able to secure tickets for the service.
Please note that DisciplesWorld Publisher and Editor Verity A. Jones will provide special coverage of many Inauguration activities, including the prayer service. Jones will blog from Jan. 18 to Jan. 21 at: disciplesworld.wordpress.com. She also will post news stories to the Disciples World home page and send short updates from the DisciplesWorld “twitter” account. To read more about ways DisciplesWorld will keep you informed, go to: www.disciplesworld.com/dynamic.html?wspID=501

Finally, Associate General Minister and Vice-President Todd Adams asks that Disciples send in hard copies of newspaper articles that have been covered in your community about Dr. Watkins and the prayer service, so that we might keep them in our official archives. Articles can be sent to: Dr. Todd Adams, Office of General Minister and President, P.O. Box 1986; Indianapolis, Ind. 46206-1986.
To read the Jan. 11 press release from the Presidential Inaugural Committee that announced Dr. Watkins selection for the prayer service and to learn updates about events taking place during the Inauguration, please visit www.disciples.org.
Please keep Sharon and the many other Disciples who will be attending the Inauguration, National Prayer Service and other events in your prayers.

Blessings,
Wanda Bryant Wills
Executive Director of Communication Ministries

Tip of the old scrub brush to Bill Longman, “Bill in the Ozarks,”  and the DoCDisc Listserv.

Other resources:

4 Comments | Barack Obama, History, Lyndon B. Johnson, President Obama, Presidents, Religion, Separation of church and state | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Evolution, other science on trial – today, in Austin, Texas

November 19, 2008

The Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) hearings on proposals for new science standards kick off today — and will probably run long into the night.

You can probably still sneak comments in.  You can listen to the hearings in streaming audio, live.  You can read the live blog reports from Texas Citizens for Science (TCS) President Steve Schafersman.

Texas science teacher Joe Lapp (a member of TCS) will give the board some good advice — will they listen?

Lapp will say:

My name is Joe Lapp, but I go by Spider Joe. I teach children about spiders, about the biology and physics of a spider’s world. My mission is to stoke passion for science in children and to empower children to think like scientists. I like to think that I’m launching these children into productive future careers as scientists, and indirectly, through them, contributing to solving some of mankind’s most serious challenges.

I’m watching what is going on here in the State Board of Education. You’re vying over what to teach about science and about evolution in particular. Some of you say, “teach the weaknesses with evolution.” Some of you say, “the ‘weaknesses’ are phony, don’t teach them.” You argue over whether science includes the supernatural or is restricted to just natural phenomena.

I ask you, how many of you grew up to be scientists? How many of you make a living teaching science to children? In a world full of people who dedicate their lives to science or science education, how many of you on the board are one of these specialized experts?

I’m suggesting that you recognize that you yourselves don’t have the answers.

We all come to the table with preferences and biases, but we’re talking about our children’s education and their future lives. When a scientist approaches a question, she may have a preferred answer, one that might win her the Nobel prize. When Pons and Fleischmann performed their cold fusion experiment, they wanted to see more energy output than input. Their bias blinded them to the truth, and rather than winning the Nobel Prize they became laughing stocks. If a scientist wants to know the truth, she must design an experiment that might show her desired outcome wrong; she must delegate her answer to the outcome of an experiment that ignores her biases.

The State Board of Education has a choice. One option is to play politics with our children’s future and vote your bias, regardless of the truth. The other option is to delegate your answer to the outcome of an experiment that ignores your biases, so that the answer better reflects the truth.

Fortunately for you, you have already performed the experiment. You delegated answers to your questions about science and evolution to experts in science and science education. They answered in the form of your September TEKS drafts. I urge you not to suffer the embarrassing fate of Pons and Fleischmann and to accept your experimental results. I suspect that politics introduced biases into the November drafts. Don’t fudge your results.

Please show your respect for children and science by making this a scientific decision and not a political one. Launch children into science by example. Envision children growing up to create new biofuels, cure cancers, eliminate AIDS, end malnutrition, reverse global warming, and save our wondrous natural resources for future generations.

Science is our children’s future.

Resources:

1 Comment | Biology, Business, Creationism, Education, Education reform, Evolution, History, Intelligent Design, Politics, Public education, Science, Separation of church and state, State school boards, Texas | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Separation of church and hate

November 18, 2008

Florida protest, photo found at Quark Soup

Florida protest, photo found at Quark Soup

We’re in the middle of grading; I confess I do not know what this protest is about (Proposition 2?  What is that?).

The line is priceless, regardless.

Who is going to order the bumperstickers?

Found the photo at Quark Soup.

1 Comment | Dissent, Free speech, Freedom - Political, Politics, Religion, Religious Freedom, Separation of church and state | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Live blogging Barbara Forrest at SMU

November 11, 2008

Speeding across Dallas at rush hour isn’t fun, but is sometimes necessary. Got here as Kathy Miller of TFN was introducing Dr. Forrest, found a seat with an outlet, it’s 6:25 CST.

Forrest’s book has an update for the Dover trial. She notes the key players at the Discovery Institute, and says she will discuss why Texas should be wary.

___________

Forrest says the “Trojan Horse” term is even more adept if we forget the Greek story, and concentrate on the computer definition of some virus that, once introduced to the system, does damage.

Forrest is doing a primer on intelligent design, the usual players, the Texas friends of the Discovery Institute, and the Wedge Strategy.

Do any readers here not know the usual intelligent design stuff?

ID code words:

  • Teach the controversy
  • Academic freedom
  • Critical analysis of evolution
  • Strengths and weaknesses of evolution
  • Strengths and limitations of evolution
  • Arguments for and against evolution

Terms are used to avoid federal courts, to dodge the radar on First Amendment.

_____________

Chou Romanesco, a vegetable, a plant that grows naturally according to Fibonacci numbers, meets all of Dembski’s rules for intelligent design. Nice photo of the stuff.

Forrest points to testimony by Ariel Roth, a young Earth creationist (YEC), which echoes almost exactly Behe’s irreducible complexity. And, to Norman Geisler on complex specified information, as Dembski uses it — but 16 years before Dembski. These are YEC ideas, she says.

_____________

Forrest says only a small handful of states — five or six — haven’t had eruptions of creationism in the past three years.

_____________

History of the Wedge Strategy: Forrest got a copy of the Wedge Strategy, leaked by Tim Duss, early on. She noticed that the Discovery Institute is following all of their confrontational strategies to promote ID, but is not doing any of the research planned and promised early on. 6:43 p.m. CST

_____________

Forrest notes that ID proponents define intelligent design in Christian gospel terms: Logos theology out of John’s Gospel. Quoting Dembski in 1999 and Johnson in 1996. “Empirically detectable in biology,” they allege.

She’s showing us that ID is rooted in creationism.

Here’s a site to see: Forrest’s stuff: http://www.creationismstrojanhorse.com/

_____________

Forrest said that compromise with creationists is always a win for creationists — “and the children lose, every time.”

_____________

After the March 1992 conference at SMU, Mark Hartwig described Dembski, Myer, Behe and other now-Discovery Institute minions as creationists, in an article in Moody Magazine designed to attract creationists from Baptist churches to their cause. Forrest relates the history of Dean Kenyon, and his morphing into an “intelligent design” advocate after he got slapped down for trying to teach creationism instead of science.

Myer, in Scientific Tenets of Faith in 1986, argues that science should presuppose the Bible.

At that point, they were openly working to get creationism into school curricula.

______________

In 1999, Meyer, with DeWolf and another, wrote Intelligent Design in Public School Science Curricula – A Legal Guidebook, in which they argued that teaching intelligent design is “a mandate” by the Supreme Court in the Edwards case. In Ohio in 2002, however, Meyer backed off from “mandate.”

In November 2003, Meyer is backed off completely from requiring ID in curricula, suggesting it’s only an effort to be fair. 7:01 p.m.

______________

Forrest played an excerpt from MSNBC’s Abrams Report featuring Steve Meyer and Eugenie Scott. He said that intelligent design is not religion, but is science.

Forrest then noted Paul Nelson’s article in Touchstone magazine, in which Meyer argues that ID doesn’t have any theory yet. She also noted several other links showing the religious nature of Meyer’s work.

Uh oh — now she turns to Dr. Don McLeroy’s Sunday School lecture on intelligent design. She’s bringing it home to Texas. McLeroy says creationists have been making these arguments for decades, and the ID movement is just the latest incarnation.

7:10 p.m.

______________

ID is “A biological theory — or, I guess you could leave off ‘biological’ . . .” according to McLeroy. Four excerpts, each showing the link to religious dogma.

______________

McLeroy sometimes says that he’s not interested in getting ID into the curricula. But almost as often, he wanders off the authorized script, and says he doesn’t believe evolution, doesn’t think that evolution should be taught, and suggests he’s all about getting ID into the schools. Watch out, Forrest warns: Bobby Jindal in Louisiana was targeted by the Discovery Institute, and so is Texas.

She’s concluding, with pictures of Texas school children in 1944, from the Library of Congress. “These little kids are now probably grandparents. It’s sad to think that their grandchildren will be no farther along in science.”

Much applause — people jockeying for the microphones. Ten minutes for questions.

_____________

First question. Guy from Utah originally wonders why creationists always attack the model, instead of going after the research.

“This isn’t about science,” Forrest said. “These guys are very smart — they know exactly what the evidence shows.” They believe teaching evolution without saying God did it, without any mention of God, that undermines the beliefs of children. “This is very much about their fear, and their attempt to control public policy.”

It’s about power, religion and politics, not science.

Second question: Who are the primary financial supporters (guy with great white beard).

No real faith-based connection — biggest donor is Howard Ahmansen, is now on the DI’s Board of Directors. Grants from evangelical organizations, but Ahmansen is the biggest donor.

Third question: How successful have they been in their goals — and what about Dawkins?

Biggest success is getting stuff out to public — “a public relations operation to kill for” — and getting information out to churches. They also cultivate high level political support, all the way up to President Bush. “That’s probably going to change.” Some applause.

Academic freedom bills introduced in six states last year. Clock ran out in Florida. Passed in Louisiana.

Dawkins: Everything DI does is in response to Dawkins’ book. It was one of two that Phillip Johnson read to make him launch the ID movement.

Fourth question: What can we do? Any chance of slick PR?

Educate and organize. They don’t hesitate to use other people’s children — organize to stop it.

Fifth question: ‘I’m aware of most of the weaknesses argument — any new ones?’

Nothing really new with evolution. “They’re recycling the old creaitonist complaints against evolution.”

But they’re now attacking the idea that the mind is a function of physical bodies. They’re claiming there is a supernatural connection — an attack on neuroscience. They say the mind is a product of the soul, not the body.

Sixth question: Fibonacci numbers used against ID. Couldn’t an intelligent being have made math that way?

“If you’re asking couldn’t there be a supernatural being who works through natural processes, that sounds like you’re asking whether God could be involved in the workings of nature.”

“I guess that’s what I’m asking.”

That’s basically mainstream religious belief, where most mainstream Christians and Jews make peace with science.

And that is something the Discovery Institute rejects utterly.

Seventh question: What about the anthropic principle?

It’s not new in ID. Forrest explains the principle with regard to ID, notes DI has a book on the stuff.

Eighth question: Thanks, guy says — he heard Meyer last spring, and he’s glad to see the dirty underbelly exposed. Are the academic freedom laws vulnerable?

Forrest says she has a paper on how the language of DI is changing, even before the Dover trial. “We at the NCSE knew we’d be seeing a raft of bills with this sanitized terminology.”

Language is sanitized, and presents more of a problem with litigation — facial challenge problems. Louisiana bill doesn’t mention ID, but uses the code words. Forrest says to look for her analysis at the Louisiana Citizens for Science website. The bill has the code words, and was sponsored by religious organizations.

But what would a judge think? Can’t say.

Ninth question: “I’m a physicist . . . but I’m also a Christian.” If there’s a supernatural explanation, it’s still not science. “They’re giving me a bad name.”

Forrest said the bad name rap is not fair. She notes Ken Miller and Keith Miller.

Questioner asks her to keep science as science and not redefine it. How do we keep science and religion separated?

Forrest said it’s a Constitutional question. Constitution says the government won’t establish religion, but that’s what a teacher does when she introduces religion into her classroom.

Forrest noted how she deals with the issue in her classes. Religion takes us beyond where science can reach. “There’s really no way to incorporate that into a science class. And why would you want to do that?” If you introduce a religious question, and science answers that question, “You have shrunk your god. Why would you want to do that?”

Kids will get religion in church and at home. They’ll get science only at school. Kids need to get it there.

_______________

Done at 7:39.  I’ll correct typos, mispellings, and other errors if I find them, and add links if I can — but later.

4 Comments | Creationism, Education, Evolution, Politics, Science, Separation of church and state, Texas, Texas Freedom Network | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Faith and Freedom speaker series: Barbara Forrest at SMU, November 11

November 10, 2008

Update:  Teachers may sign up to get CEU credits for this event.  Check in at the sign-in desk before the event — certificates will be mailed from SMU later.

It will be one more meeting of scientists that Texas State Board of Education Chairman Dr. Don McLeroy will miss, though he should be there, were he diligent about his public duties.

Dr. Barbara Forrest, one of the world’s foremost experts on “intelligent design” and other creationist attempts to undermine the teaching of evolution, will speak in the Faith and Freedom Speaker Series at Southern Methodist University (SMU) in Dallas.   Her evening presentation will serve as a warning to Texas: “Why Texans Shouldn’t Let Creationists Mess with Science Education.”

Dr. Forrest’s presentation is at 6:00 p.m., in the Hughes-Trigg Student Center in the Hughes-Trigg Theatre, at SMU’s Campus. The Faith and Freedom Speaker Series is sponsored by the Texas Freedom Network’s (TFN) education fund.  Joining TFN are SMU’s Annette Caldwell Simmons School of Education and Human Development, Center for Teaching Excellence, Department of Anthropology, Department of Biological Sciences, and Department of Philosophy.

Hughes-Trigg is at 3140 Dyer Street, on SMU’s campus (maps and directions available here).

Seating is limited for the lecture; TFN urges reservations be made here.

Dr. Forrest being interviewed by PBSs NOVA crew, in 2007. Southeastern Louisiana University photo.

Dr. Forrest being interviewed by PBS's NOVA crew, in 2007. Southeastern Louisiana University photo.

From TFN:

Dr. Barbara Forrest
is Professor of Philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana University. She is the co-author with Paul R. Gross of Creationism’s Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design (2004; 2007), which details the political and religious aims of the intelligent design creationist movement.  She served as an expert witness in the first legal case involving intelligent design, Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District. She is a member of the Board of Directors for the National Center for Science Education and Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Widely recognized as a leading expert on intelligent design, she has appeared on Larry King Live, ABC’s Nightline, and numerous other television and radio programs.

Also see:

Leave a Comment » | Accuracy, Biology, Creationism, Education, Education quality, Ethics, Evolution, Famous trials, Freedom - Political, geology, Heroes, History, Hoaxes, Intelligent Design, Junk science, Jurisprudence, Justice, Law, Natural history, Paleontology, Politics, Public education, Rampant stupidity, Science, Separation of church and state, State school boards, Teaching, Texas, Texas Citizens for Science, Texas Freedom Network, Textbook Selection, Voodoo science, War on Education, War on Science | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Slinging mud, losing elections

November 1, 2008

Encouraging reports from North Carolina, not-so-encouraging reports from Kentucky.

In North Carolina, Sen. Elizabeth Dole’s campaign dived into negative campaigning, with a crude and inaccurate campaign ad against her rising-in-the-polls opponent, state Sen. Kay Hagan.  It appears many voters are disgusted with the negative ads.  In any case, the Charlotte Observer wrote an editorial condemning Dole’s ad and negative tone, “Dole’s desperate turn to Big Lie advertising.” Good on them.

In Kentucky, however, we learn that negative campaigning can still pack a punch among poorly educated or bigoted groups.  The Lexington Herald-Leader has a poll showing significant portions of Kentucky voters think Barack Obama is Muslim.

One might recall Dumas Malone’s description of the election of 1800, between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson.  Jefferson thought it beneath his dignity, and not part of American politics, to discuss a candidate’s religious faith.  Alexander Hamilton, on behalf of Adams, led a campaign of calumny in newspapers throughout the U.S. saying that because Jefferson was atheist, as president he’d send the army to confiscate Bibles.  Jefferson refused to respond.  Malone notes that on election day, fully half of all American voters were convinced Jefferson was atheist.

They voted for Jefferson anyway, rather than stick with the failed policies of Adams.  There’s a lesson in there somewhere.

1 Comment | Campaigns, Obama 2008, Politics, Religion, Separation of church and state | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Read this: Teaching science is hard, made harder by religious claptrap

August 24, 2008

Page A1 of the New York Times on Sunday, August 24, 2008: “A Teacher on the Front Line as Faith and Science Clash.”

Read it, and consider these questions:

  1. Would your local paper have the guts to report on this issue, for your local schools? (The Times went to Florida; heaven knows few Florida papers could cover the issue in Florida so well.)
  2. What is your local school board doing to support science education, especially for evolution, in your town? Or is your local school board making it harder for teachers to do their jobs?
  3. What is your state education authority doing to support science education, especially in evolution, in your state? Or is your state school board working to make it harder for teachers to do their jobs, and working to dumb down America’s kids?
  4. Do your school authorities know that they bet against your students when they short evolution, because knowledge about evolution is required for 25% of the AP biology test, and is useful for boosting scores on the SAT and ACT?
  5. Does your state science test test evolution?
  6. Do your school authorities understand they are throwing away taxpayer dollars when they encourage the teaching of voodoo science, like intelligent design?

It takes a good paper like the Times to lay it on the line:

The Dover decision in December of that year [2005] dealt a blow to “intelligent design,” which posits that life is too complex to be explained by evolution alone, and has been widely promoted by religious advocates since the Supreme Court’s 1987 ban on creationism in public schools. The federal judge in the case called the doctrine “creationism re-labeled,” and found the Dover school board had violated the constitutional separation of church and state by requiring teachers to mention it. The school district paid $1 million in legal costs.

That hasn’t slowed the Texas State Board of Education’s rush to get the state entangled in litigation over putting religious dogma in place of science. The Texas Education Agency (TEA) is already embroiled in one suit, brought by the science-promoting science curriculum expert they fired for noting in an e-mail that science historian Barbara Forrest was speaking in a public event in Austin. TEA may well lose this case, and their side is not helped when State Board Chairman Don McLeroy cavorts with creationists in a session teaching illegal classroom tactics to teachers. Clearly Texas education officials are not reading the newspapers, the court decisions, or the science books.

Here’s one of the charts accompanied the article. While you read it, consider these items: The top 10% of science students in China outnumber all the science students in the U.S.; the U.S. last year graduated more engineers from foreign countries than from the U.S.; the largest portion were from China. China graduated several times the number of engineers the U.S. did, and almost all of them were from China.

Copyright 2008 by the New York Times

Copyright 2008 by the New York Times

Can we afford to dumb down any part of our science curriculum, for any reason? Is it unfair to consider creationism advocates, including intelligent design advocates, as “surrender monkeys in the trade and education wars with China?”

Update: 10:00 p.m. Central, this story is the most e-mailed from the New York Times site today; list below the fold.

Read the rest of this entry »

5 Comments | Biology, Charles Darwin, Creationism, Darwin, Education, Education quality, Evolution, Intelligent Design, Politics, Public education, Religion, Science, Separation of church and state, State school boards, Teaching, Texas, Texas Citizens for Science, Texas Education Agency (TEA), Texas Freedom Network, Voodoo science, War on Education, War on Science | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Rick Warren and George Washington

August 17, 2008

At American Creation, Tom Van Dyke looks at the questions paster Rick Warren asked Sen. John McCain and Sen. Barack Obama, with an eye to history.

George Washington probably would have flunked the test, had he been on the dais yesterday, Van Dyke notes.

Santayana’s Ghost shifts nervously.

Washington Bible - image from the Masonic Library and Museum

"Washington Bible" - image from the Masonic Library and Museum

Leave a Comment » | Elections, First Amendment, History, McCain 2008, Obama 2008, Politics, Religion, Santayana's ghost, Separation of church and state | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

That shudder was Texas thinking about really teaching the Bible in public schools

August 8, 2008

Among other issues I’ve not followed closely on the blog due to a way too-busy summer is the issue of teaching the Bible in Texas public schools. The Texas Lege, failing to get a contract with Comedy Central, passed a law that says every public school district in Texas “may” teach a course in the Bible if kids petition for it.

The bill had fancier, slightly more legal language, but was just about that ambiguous (having drafted my first federal law <cough>34</cough> years ago, and having written many amendments to state, federal and local laws, and having survived the rigorous legislative drafting course at George Washington, I feel qualified to complain about the problems in the law’s language).

Left hanging were answers to these questions:

  • Who or what determines the curriculum for such a course?
  • Does the law require the district to offer the class, when a request is made? For one student? For ten?
  • Will the state provide money to offer the class, since every district in the state is under-funded?
  • Will the State School Board authorize texts for the class, so individual districts don’t have to spring to buy the texts, even though the state fund is grossly underfunded and text purchases in core areas like mathematics, science and English go begging?

The question about whether the law requires a course to be offered was bucked over to the Texas Attorney General’s office, but so far they have ducked the issue (if Greg Abbott were alive today, I’m sure they would have given a quicker answer so schools could prepare).

The question on whether the SBOE would offer guidance on curriculum was also answered in July. No.

About three dozen school districts in Texas’s 254 counties already offer courses in the Bible. Some have been sued for offering more of a Sunday school class, and they lost, or settled, by requiring real academic rigor.

What are the stakes?

Well, consider that Texas also has among the highest teen-age, school-girl pregnancy rates in the nation, which contributes mightily to a staggering drop out rate. Shouldn’t Texans be happy that kids can get instruction on Biblical history and its use as literature?

Well, have you read the Bible?

Christian Beyer, who blogs at Sharp Iron, noted in comments at John Shore’s blog, Suddenly Christian, in a thread about whether God cares if one is married or unmarried:

You know, I think you just might be right.

Anita over on her blog [Grace Unfolding] wrote an interesting article related to what you are saying, and she surprised the heck out of me with a new Biblical revelation (for me, anyway). The dude and the chick in Song of Songs (Song of Solomon?), even though they ended up in the sack, were NOT MARRIED! [bolding and link added]

http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/gay-okay-sex-no-way/

I never really cared for the Song of Songs before – too many Christian guys quoting it to me when they bragged about how ‘Godly’ their marriage was and how the Holy Spirit was giving their sex life a boost. Puh-leese! Breasts like fawns? What’s next – thigh’s like calves? (Wait a minute… )

How will this play in Crawford, Beaumont, Pleasant Grove, Crockett or Paris? Oh, my.

So far the SBOE has gone with a “teach the controversy” philosophy in science. Turnabout is fair play, no?

Additional resources:

10 Comments | Education, Politics, Public education, Religion, Separation of church and state, Texas, Texas Education Agency (TEA), Texas Freedom Network, Texas Lege, Textbook Selection | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Thank God, and the Courts, for Charles Darwin

July 6, 2008

Rev. Michael Dowd has a book out, ThankGod for Evolution, and he wrote an op-ed in the Dallas Morning News on July 1 (as I understand it — wasn’t in Dallas that day).

I don’t vouch for the book — yet, at least. I’ve not read it. I find the study of science, and especially of evolution, offers no barrier to my faith, nor does my faith offer any barrier to my study of science. My faith, which requires an ethical life, offers barriers to creationism — a subject of other posts. But thank God for Charles Darwin? Sure. 

“Thank God for Charles Darwin.” T-shirt design from Redbubble

 

We also need to thank the federal courts, where the First Amendment is enforced, keeping unreasonable fables from diluting science education in public schools.

Which gets us to this: Chris Comer, the former science curriculum expert for the Texas Education Agency (TEA) who was fired for sending out an e-mail seen as supportive of evolution, is suing TEA, to get her job back (it’s illegal to fire public employees for bad religious reasons).

Watch that suit.

Rev. Dowd’s essay, courtesy of Sam Hodges and the Dallas Morning News Religion Blog, below the fold.

Read the rest of this entry »

5 Comments | Biology, Charles Darwin, Creationism, Darwin, Evolution, Public education, Religion, Science, Separation of church and state, State school boards, Texas, Texas Citizens for Science, Texas Education Agency (TEA) | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Dobson group pushes religious nature of intelligent design, in New Zealand

June 29, 2008

In the end, Dr. James Dobson and other ideological Christians may be the worst enemies of the idea that intelligent design should be taught as science. They just can’t resist emphasizing that ID is, to them, good Christian doctrine.

In the latest outbreak, the New Zealand chapter of Dobson’s group Focus on the Family has sent copies of the DVD, “The Privileged Planet,” to 400 New Zealand high schools. Why?

Focus on the Family’s executive director Tim Sisarich said the material was intended to expose pupils to an alterative theory of cosmology.

“We’re a Christian organisation so we believe that God made the planet and God made the cosmos … Science takes a theory and tries to establish it as the truth, and that’s all this is.”

Education Ministry senior manager Mary Chamberlain said parents had a right to withdraw children from religious instruction.

This undercuts the lobby group, Discovery Institute (DI), which argues that intelligent design should be considered good science and not religiously related. The DVD in question features an intelligent design advocate, Guillermo Gonzalez, who was denied tenure at Iowa State University in 2007 — in that flap, DI argued that the DVD was good science, not religion.

Creationism does tend to require being flexible on the truth. When fundraising, or when trying to defend Christian ideas, intelligent design is Christian doctrine. When DI and others are trying to sneak ID into science curricula in the U.S., it’s not religion at all, but scientifically related.

Treating subjects in that fashion is a form of moral relativism, or to most people, simple dishonesty.

(The discussion at the site of the Dominion Post is quite lively; see what New Zealanders think of intelligent design.)

Tip of the old scrub brush to Dr. Bumsted at Grassroots Science.

Update: P. Z. Myers at Pharyngula was already on it. Morris, Minnesota is just such a hub of scientific activity, it’s difficult to stay ahead of Dr. Myers when we’re stuck here in what appears to be the scientific backwater of Dallas.

13 Comments | Creationism, Education, Intelligent Design, Politics, Religion, Science, Separation of church and state | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »