Bush wants alternatives to Darwinism taught in school

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/e3658032-03...00e2511c8.html

Quote:

---

Bush wants alternatives to Darwinism taught in school
By Caroline Daniel in Washington
Published: August 3 2005 03:00 | Last updated: August 3 2005 03:00

President George W. Bush stirred the debate on the teaching of evolution in schools when he said this week that he supported the teaching of alternative viewpoints - such as the theory of Intelligent Design - to help students "understand what the debate is about".


"I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought," Mr Bush said in comments to five Texas newspapers on Monday. "You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes."

Although Mr Bush did not explicitly endorse the concept of Intelligent Design, which contends that certain features of biological systems are best explained by an "intelligent" cause rather than by natural selection, such influential groups as the National Academy of Sciences strongly oppose the teaching of ID in schools.

Mr Bush's comments threaten to place him outside the mainstream of scientific opinion and align him more closely with social conservatives and with "creationists" who challenge Darwinism on religious grounds.

"Mr Bush would have done better to heed his White House science adviser, John Marburger, who said that evolution was the 'cornerstone of modern biology' and who has characterised ID as not even being a scientific theory," said Glenn Branch, deputy director of the National Center for Science Education, a group that defends the teaching of evolution. Mr Marburger expres-sed those views in an online discussion with the Chronicle of Higher Education in March, Mr Branch said.

"The federal government has very little influence over curriculums and instruction. The most Mr Bush could accomplish is stirring up the feeling that he supports the creationists' position," said Mr Branch. Yet mainstream Republican opinion has begun to show differences on matters of religion and science. Last week Bill Frist, the Senate majority leader, distanced himself from Mr Bush's restrictive position on stem cell research, putting forward a bill that would enable the expansion of research using embryonic stem cells. "It isn't just a matter of faith, it's a matter of science," Mr Frist said.

Efforts to promote ID have been on the rise with the help of such groups as the Discovery Institute in Seattle. In a broadcast yesterday Dr James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, an influential conservative group, also predicted: "We are now on the verge of major changes in how the origins of life and evolution are taught in science class rooms across the nation."

In Kansas, the board of education is concluding hearings on whether creationism can be taught in schools. Georgia's Cobb County school system has placed labels on textbooks saying "Evolution is a theory, not a fact", and New York lawmakers attempted but lost a recent effort to enact a law requiring state schools to teach both ID and evolutionary theory.

John West, a director at the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture, recently accused "the new Darwinian fundamentalists of becoming just as intolerant as the religious fundamentalists they despise".

---

I thought this was interesting, good points on both sides I must admit. And why must schools feel obligated to pick a theory (a single solitary theory) and teach it as though it is fact? Whether that be creationism or evolution? I do think Bush made a relatively good point when he said that people should be exposed to different ideas. Ironic that he of all people would make such a statement/idea it does make me suspicious of his full intentions with this however...

In my school Creation was taught AS FACT. There was an answer in support of Creationism for every question or point you could possibly have to support evolution. We were taught the debate and the fight to win the argument, rather than the facts, ideas, possibilities, and theories.

I think the extremism can work both ways (though if you have to pick one to teach, I think Darwinism makes the most logical and scientific sense) though I dont believe public schools are quite as intolerant of discussing new or different ideas as christian private schools can be.

Do they have philosphy classes in public high schools? I support Darwinism taught as far as the science aspect, but I do not think that because of that the discussion of different ideas should be abandoned either. :cool:

Good post. As far as my opinion, I would like to see a very high wall between church and state. As for education, our schools have enough problems without using them as political battlegrounds, which is exactly what is going on here. Let's focus more on paying our teachers a decent wage and improving test scores and forget about all of this religious debate. There is a place for everything, but this creationism and intelligent design have no place in our public schools, in my humble opinion. Leave religion up to the parents and churches, use our schools to teach our children what they need to know to make it through life.

"I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought," Mr Bush said in comments to five Texas newspapers on Monday. "You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes."

MY FEELINGS EXACTLY !!! Different schools of thought like Cannabis is a natural herb with significant medicinal qualities, much safer and healthier than cigarettes and alcohol, and should be legalized.

As much asd I agree with Bush's statement that everybody should be exposed from different schools of thought and perspectives, I don't think that - if I could read his mind, which I can't - I would agree with his motives. Using the past as a frame of reference, I can imagine that this is just a way to get this kind of teaching into the classroom. I doubt that, if creationism and evolutionism were to 'switch places' (so to speak), he would be saying the same thing.

The irony of this entire debate is that the Big Bang was a theory that the Catholic church grabbed right onto... several hundred years ago. And there was Pope John Paul II's statement regarding evolution in 1996:

"Today, almost half a century after the publication of [Pius XII's] Encyclical, fresh knowledge has led to the recognition that evolution is more than a hypothesis. It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory."

Interesting, no?

Of course I think that our children should be exposed to different ideas. I also think adults should, including Bush, lol. I just think it's interesting that Christianity chooses to either embrace or reject certain things, based on a whim of how it will affect the church at the time. When our kids or lovers or friends behave like this, we call them on it & tell them to get real. When someone in a pulpit does it, people are willing to die & kill for it. Silly people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papaw

but this creationism and intelligent design have no place in our public schools, in my humble opinion. Leave religion up to the parents and churches, use our schools to teach our children what they need to know to make it through life.

---

Iâ??m going to half to disagree with you there papawâ?¦

If Iâ??m not mistaken school is about learning how the world works. Iâ??m going to guess that about ¾ of the people of this planet believe in some type of divine creator. Iâ??m not saying Darwin was wrong about everything, just that maybe heâ??s not exactly right either. Teachers would not be teaching religion (as in how to practice) they would be acknowledging popular thought. Some people believe yada yada monkies some people belive yada yada God and the rest believe a smattering of both.

Iâ??m really tired of schools these days. To pretend religion does not exist only perpetuates ignorance. I once watched a biology teachers face practically melt off because she just thought I was gonna say something about God. So now we have a room full of kids with questions in their minds that they canâ??t ask because of the God police. So instead we pretend that nothing happening. God in school has become that little secret that everyone knows about but dances around.

I think students should become familiar with what people in the world actually think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by likemclever

Iâ??m really tired of schools these days. To pretend religion does not exist only perpetuates ignorance. I once watched a biology teachers face practically melt off because she just thought I was gonna say something about God. So now we have a room full of kids with questions in their minds that they canâ??t ask because of the God police. So instead we pretend that nothing happening. God in school has become that little secret that everyone knows about but dances around.

---

I agree. America tends to overcompensate for whats percieved as a wrongdoing. We seem to have trouble finding the happy-medium, and must live with the consequences of over-correction. Being politically correct is a good example of such. As well as affirmative action. Now we are seeing the troubles with the total elimination of any and all religion in school.

I wouldnt want my child taught what to believe, but I would like them exposed to different ideas.

Quote:

---

I think students should become familiar with what people in the world actually think.

---

I agree once more. The public school system (probably fueled by parents though) seems to want to protect the children from real life issues that they will probably be faced with in their adulthood. Seems cruel to me to think that a child would be better off or more "safe" being ignorant or assuming that they'll "just figure it out" when it comes to very complicated, complex issues.

I agree with papaw on the church/state thing. Evolution is a theory but has an extremely high PROBABLITY of explaining our observations of living things. Darwin saw its results on the Beagle. Genetics has observed the evolution of genes in labs and "in the wild." It's as close to fact as you can get. Let the parents and churches try to justify creationism for themselves and their children.

I have nothing more to add, but I would like to commend everyone on the intelligent and respectful debate. Thanks for the posts everyone. It's nice to see a discussion where everyone respects the opinions of others. I know I've said it before, but thanks Ousted for the well thought out thread. Take care all.

back at ya papaw....