Are our kids being brainwashed?

[shortalias]

Why did they write thise things?? They thought it would give you something to write about in forums

 

[Riprorin]

How's this for academic freedom?

Two years ago, the Kansas State Board of Education changed it's science standards to allow teachers to discuss the "logical" explanations of science rather than only the "natural" ones. That is, it broadened what teachers may discuss. It did not, as some media erroneously reported, kick evolution out of the schools. Because of the board's decision, the media painted Kansas as "backwards." For example, last year the Advancement of Science "graded" Kansas with an "F+" for broadening it's science standards. After a viscious public relations campaign, foes of academic freedom took over the school board. Linda Holloway, who has 20 years of public education experience and helped establish Kansas students' freedom to learn, was replaced by a real estate agent...Those opposing the teaching of intelligent design theory are determined. Jack Krebs of the Kansas Citizens for Science insists ID is not scientific, but religious. He has helped keep his state's science standards strictly naturalistic. Creationism and design theory are banned.

Roger DeHart taught at the Burlington-Edison High School in Washington state. He presented creation theory, intelligent design and evolution theory, even showing "Inherit the Wind." He did not promote any theory over another. The ACLU complained the DeHart was "violating the law" by teaching intelligent design. After 15 years of teaching Biology, DeHart lost his position. The school replace him with a teacher fresh out of college. In Minnesota, Rodney LeVake faced a similar reaction. LeVake taught evolutionary theory but wanted to introduce intelligent design. So, he lost his job. Students are also gagged. School officials prohibited Pennridge HS senior JoeBaker from distributing fliers with scientific challenges to evolution. Citing the Student Expression policy, they accused him of "libel" against teachers. Rutherford Institute attorney's are representing him in a free speech suit.

At a 2000 conference, Dr. William Dembski set up a forum on design theory at Baylor University. International scientists from both sides of the aisle participated. But faculty protested, and Baylor ended Dembski's position as director of its Polanyi Center.

- Catherina Hurlburt

 

[andaval]

Riporion - "intelligent design theory" is not a theory. Anyone who suggests that this is a theory has a hidden agenda of forcing monotheism on our nation's children. If you don't believe in evolution it is not just evolution you don't believe in. You are also saying you don't believe in genetics, anatomy, ecology, animal behavior, paleontology, and more. If you're going to disregard so much science arbitrarily, why don't you do us all a favor and stop using your "magical" computer. I think it is sad that it is so important for some people to believe in their religion, but they don't have enough faith to do so, so they rely on pseudoscience to make themselves feel better.

 

[Riprorin]

andaval, to the best of my knowledge, ID theory has no committment to any interpretation of the Scripture. ID simply says that purpose and intelligence are fundamental to our understanding of the world.

How does teaching ID with other theories on origins force monotheism on our children?

 

[Bobomatic]

duh, the kids are being brainwashed, everyone knows we came from the sun, which really dosent exist and is a product of our imaginations.

 

[PistachioByAzul]

How does teaching ID with other theories on origins force monotheism on our children?

I think because, in this country, there's generally a very thin line between ID and the Christian God.

There's really nothing to teach regarding ID, other than it exists as an ultimate possibility, and that it's not mutually exclusive from science in the least. I do question the motive here though, since you are pushing your own Christian agenda.

More than science, I think this is a function of the crappy public education system as a whole, and seems to be more indicative of poorly thought out textbooks.

 

[Riprorin]

EngineNr9, here's a good article for you regarding ID:

Text

 

[PistachioByAzul]

I guess I should clarify that my ideal of science already encompasses both intelligent design and the 'non-possibility' of it. Maybe that's not really science, just dumb paradoxical metaphysics. I cite your agenda because I feel like you see something that's wrong, but you're only focusing on what you take offense to, and not the bigger picture. The bigger picture being, as I see it, that there's no place for absolutism and dismissive reasoning in the education of young people, unless it is counter-balanced with the appropriate antithesis.

The textbook is sloppy, lacking cohesive details it treats debatable theory as fact. I think approaching it that way would yield more productive results.