Albion

Discussions of the origin of the universe don't constitute a slippery slope as long as the scientific discussions are kept in science class and taught on their scientific merit and the philosophical and religious discussions are kept in philosophy or religion classes and taught in terms of their philosophical and religious implications. If you start teaching that something is shaky science on some basis other than scientific, that's where the slippery slope starts. I don't suppose any Christians want to see science introduced into the comparative-religion classes to undermine any of the various creation stories.

So if the majority think that smoking is safe, the medical establishment should go along with that? It doesn't alter the fact that cigarettes contain carcinogens. If the majority thinks that abortion is evil, it's OK for the NIH site to post misinformation or take down real information on the subject of abortion and breast cancer? The opinion of the majority - even the majority of scientists - is irrelevant in science if the data point to some other conclusion. The definition of a scientific theory isn't dependent on how many people get their religion-based knickers in a twist over its social and political implications.

The voters can say what they like and are welcome to believe what they like personally. They aren't entitled to start dictating, on a nonscientific basis, what counts as sound science and what doesn't. Science classes at school are intended to introduce children to the subject and to the state of scientific thinking at the time they're learning. The religious sensibilities of a bunch of nonscientists are irrelevant. The theory of evolution by variation and selection is the current best scientific explanation for the diversity of life, and as such it deserves to be taught along with all the other current best scientific explanations of other phenomena.

Arbogast

We just have an intractable debate here...

I agree 100% evolution is what should be taught in a science class.

I also believe 100% that Elected Officials should teach science in a manner that satisfies the local electorate. I dont see where what they have done is a violation of the seperation of Church and State. (Now, if they head in the direction they are going in a few more steps they will be violating the seperation)

I dont see where the Constitution has much to say on the subject of what constitutes acceptable science in a Public School.

I think it is terrible to use the courts to dictate what people are supposed to think, in a matter that clearly (in my little view) is the responcability of the local school board.

I think it is dishonorable to use the courts to force upon a community a world view it does not accept.

Arbogast

"So if the majority think that smoking is safe, the medical establishment should go along with that"

Dont see what that has to do with anything...

If people wish to be stupid and smoke in a designated smoking area that seems legitamate to me, if the majority is in favor...

scigirl

Arbogast - I see your point, and on some level I agree with you. The courts can make all the decisions they want, but ultimately it does come down to the local school boards - and the local teachers - to carry out the education of our kids. And if they are forced to teach evolution, or teach creation, against their will - something tells me they will do a shitty job.

I do think that the school boards can't just legislate in and out what they want their kids to be taught -

I guess I just wish I lived in a society that valued the pursuit of science and truth above religious dogma.

sigh. . . . girl

RufusAtticus

Ahh, but remember that the will of the majority is tempered by the rights of tha minority.

Naw, putting a religiously motivated textbook disclaimer on public textbooks is not respecting an establishment of religion.

The courts would not be forcing anything on the community. Hint: schools != community.

Arbogast

The minority has a right not to be trampled by the majority, but a majority is allowed to be stupid and mistaken in a belief system in a free and open society.

Occasionally, the stupid and mistaken belief system is actually correct, and that is an important part of progress...

RufusAtticus

No one is saying that they can't be creationists. What they're saying is that decisions on the education in a public school, can't be religiously modivated, especially when the issue has been settled years ago in the courts.