Jump to content
blue note blue note (New Member) New Member

TX School Board Scrubs Liberals from History Texbooks

Lounge   (1,709 Views 18 Comments)
7,250 Visitors; 1,032 Posts
If you find this topic helpful leave a comment.

You are reading page 2 of TX School Board Scrubs Liberals from History Texbooks. If you want to start from the beginning Go to First Page.

I believe God created the universe.

There is no factual proof for this belief. It is faith.

It is NOT science.

Teaching about faith and belief does not belong in a science class.

A good analogy would be to explain that the original theory and then the law of gravity is not applicable away from a planet such as in outer space.

Or that the theory that rotting meat created maggots has been disproved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I'd like to read the offending paragraph, but in general I have no problem with keeping intelligent design out of science curricula.

Let me try to explain why without deifying either science or any other field of thought.

Science is both a specific body of knowledge and the method used to arrive at that body of knowledge. As I understand the process, it starts with observing events, formulating a theory that attempts to explain those events then designing experiments to confirm or deny the theory. If the evidence does not support the theory, then the theory is discarded and everyone tries again.

Intelligent design shouldn't be part of science curricula because the theory isn't science in any sense of the term.

There's no way to confirm or disprove the existence of the designer. How would you word the hypothesis in the first place and what experiment would you do to test it?

In short, intelligent design may well be true, but there's no way to prove or disprove it using the scientific method. If it can't be tested, it isn't science.

The scientific method is, indeed, only one way of "knowing" ... there are other ways of knowing, ie intuitive, but if you stop at the "intuitive hit" without being able to test it, then it ain't science and has no place in a science textbook.

Sociology, philosophy, comparative religions ... now there's a different story. As you've stated the issue, the problem wasn't with children being told about intelligent design ... it was with intelligent design being included in a science text when the theory is untestable and therefore not science.

ETA: and I happen to agree with Elvish, the two are not mutually exclusive.

It wasn't about teaching ID.

It was about informing the students that some people believed differently.

But you have convieniently given a good argument for removal of many of the tenets of evolution from science curriculum.

The judge's comments about intelligent design were spot on accurate, but they didn't apply to the case he ruled on. The people weren't trying to teach intelligent design, or promote religion. Right ruling, wrong case.

The people who filed a complaint about their children being informed that some people (of no particular persuasion, religious or otherwise), were not a bunch of conservatives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is what they wanted removed from science texts.

They wanted a paragraph removed that simply pointed out that there are people who believe that the earth was created by a deity.

It didn't specify a religion or a deity, and there are hundreds of religions that believe in a spiritualized creator.

They didn't want the children to be told the FACT that there are some people who believe in a creation process. It was not in conflict with the permitted topic of evolution, it didn't teach what specifically these people believed about creation, and it didn't endorse the theory. It simply pointed out that some people don't believe solely in the theory of evolution, it was one paragraph, and for some reason, it frightened those democrats to think that the children would be made aware that there were people who believed something different.

The FACT that some people believe in a god or gods belongs in a sociology or anthropology text, not a science book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my remarks look like this ...

it wasn't about teaching id.

it was about informing the students that some people believed differently.

but no-one said don't inform them ... just that it's not science and doesn't belong in science class

but you have convieniently given a good argument for removal of many of the tenets of evolution from science curriculum.

that's highly likely. it is in the nature of the scientific process that, as ideas are questioned and tested some are found to be fos and are discarded. this is not possible with ideas of intelligent design ... they are inherently untestable and that's what makes them "not science".

the judge's comments about intelligent design were spot on accurate, but they didn't apply to the case he ruled on. the people weren't trying to teach intelligent design, or promote religion. right ruling, wrong case.

the people who filed a complaint about their children being informed that some people (of no particular persuasion, religious or otherwise), were not a bunch of conservatives.

i finally got around to reading the science teachers' memo cited by bluenote and was gratified that their central argument was pretty much the same as mine.:clown: gmta, y'all!

 

a couple more random thoughts on the op:

 

i participated briefly in another thread in which we discussed a proposal to federally fund parenting classes. many posters were quite leery of it mostly due to the danger of biased values being forced on the recipients of that education. wonder if this school board's actions is what they were talking about.

 

the fact is, i'd welcome a discussion of the role of religion in the european invasion of this continent. actually, it would be the role of religious justifications for the very unreligious behavior of many of the europeans toward both each other (my home state of massachusetts, for instance) as well as toward the people they found already living here.

 

we have a long history of deep, honest religious conviction being exploited to promote an agenda that has nothing to do with faith or christian values.

 

but, somehow, i don't think that's what that particular school board had in mind.

 

 

Edited by heron
grammar and expanded thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:banghead: This is not real. What I mean is, this cannot be real. Is this real? I currently live in Texas and, well, I'm less than impressed. Now I have just one more reason to pile up about why I don't want my daughter to attend school in Texas.

The following is a True Story!

My husband moved to TX in 10th grade and did a science report on skin grafting. He worked hard, had good sources, did plenty of reading and wrote an honest report. His report noted that leftover skin from the circumcised penis was being used as skin grafts. His teacher was extremely unhappy that he would have to mention the words 'penis' and circumcision in front of the entire class and told him he would not be giving his report and would receive a ZERO! He had to appeal with the principal and was finally allowed to give his report to the teacher ONLY, not to the entire class. Gosh, how offensive the human body and science are here in Texas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The FACT that some people believe in a god or gods belongs in a sociology or anthropology text, not a science book.

You are exactly right and spot on. Why should science books have text that read, "some people believe in intelligent design"? What does that have to do with science?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×