Utah Votes 'No' to Darwin's Critics

NewbieV writes "An article in Tuesday's New York Times notes that proposed legislation which would have 'stress[ed] that not all scientists agree on which theory regarding the origins of life, or the origins or present state of the human race, is correct;' has failed by a 46-28 vote in a Republican-controlled state House of Representatives."

Good Riddance To Yet More Bad Rubbish

Much more information regarding this decision can be found in this Salt Lake Tribune article [sltrib.com], including many memorable quotes from the legislators involved.

From TFA:

...religion infused the debate on SB96 from the beginning. [Senator Chris] Buttars forwarded the proposal because he insisted many evolution lessons contradict religious instruction. He is disgusted by the idea that humans evolved from what he calls a "lower species."

Also from TFA (this one is priceless):

"There are a number of influential legislators who believe you evolved from an ape," Buttars said following the vote. "I didn't."

Kudos to the Utah House of Representatives for giving this bill (as well as Senator Buttars himself) the treatment they both so richly deserve.

Re:Good Riddance To Yet More Bad Rubbish

"There are a number of influential legislators who believe you evolved from an ape," Buttars said following the vote. "I didn't."

I don't the apes would want to claim Buttars as a descendant, either.

Ape-descended legislators...

> > There are a number of influential legislators who believe you evolved from an ape," Buttars said following the vote. "I didn't."
>
> I don't the apes would want to claim Buttars as a descendant, either.

Far out in the uncharted backwaters

Butt-ars?

any relationship with Butt-head?

Re:Butt-ars?

Well, listening to the morning [livejournal.com] radio [x96.com] here one comes to realize that Buttars is pronounced Butters, much akin to the poor chap living in Southpark, CO. He is, of course, not known here for Just the anti-darwin bill, but essentially Every horrible bill that is put before the state legislature. Everything from anti-gay bills to anti-hate crime bills to anti-video games bills all start with, or are strongly supported by, Chris Buttars. If he did not attend, I'd say roughly 50-75% more actual work would get done (note: this of course, would still not be a lot, this is Utah we're talking about).

For more Chris Buttars, please read [livejournal.com] through his various appearances as a nominee for "Boner of the Day" (morning show, daily moron contest).

Some of his great quotes include:

• "A great deal of my political stands come from my faith. I represent the values that have always been America's morality." - Chris Buttars
• "If you read the homosexual rule book, you'll find their greatest target is your kids." - Chris Buttars
• "I don't think the conservative side of the aisle understands incrementalism and the liberal side does, and that is one way we got beat." - Chris Buttars
• "The [government] has become totally hostile to moral and religious ideals." - Chris Buttars
• "They're everywhere. They're getting into everything, The homosexual community is going to undermine society." - Chris Buttars

Re:Butt-ars?

I think he may have been reading from the christianity playbook, which also seems to target my kids, I have never had a gay person come to the door and ask me about their (the kid's)immortal soul. But when I moved into my new house a few years back they (

Re:Good Riddance To Yet More Bad Rubbish

Also from TFA (this one is priceless):

"There are a number of influential legislators who believe you evolved from an ape," Buttars said following the vote. "I didn't."

However, there are several legislators who believe Senator Buttars may be evolve

Re:Good Riddance To Yet More Bad Rubbish

Once again some people are deforming the Evolution theory to make their point.
The theory doesn't say man evolved from the ape but that man and ape once had a _common ancestor_. But I guess we can't expect everybody to be well-informed, even those who hold

Re:Good Riddance To Yet More Bad Rubbish

I like this one better:

"Frankly I am not interested in teaching our kids what is in fact based solely on scientific inferences," [James Ferrin] said.

Something tells me he has no problems teaching kids "facts" based solely on open interpretation of 3000+

Re:Good Riddance To Yet More Bad Rubbish

And if he wants to look at superior beeings, look to cockroaches, sharks and crocodiles. They have outlived almost every other spieces on the planet.

Re:Good Riddance To Yet More Bad Rubbish

However, "evolution" with respect to the origin of life is a theory.

Evolution does not concern itself with the origin of life. Evolution is the fact that organisms reproduce, mutate, and change. Evolution by natural selection is an important biologic

Evolution/IEducation

Yknow, this makes me want to vent about the whole "Intellegent Design" argument.

Whether teaching Evolution, "Intellegent Design", or this Utah "4 out of 5 Dentists agree" crap, the problem is not the teaching of these theories. The key problem is teaching children to question conventional wisdom. Kids need to be taught to always question what they know. Kids need to know what your teacher teaches you is what everyone "thinks" to be right at the moment, but who knows what the future will bring. If you're going to lobby gangbusters to teach the kids of today something, teach them to evaluate what they are taught themselves. The world is many shades of grey, not black and white.

P.S. - I always slept through English class

Re:Evolution/IEducation

It's just so much easier to unquestioningly accept anything at face value.

Re:Evolution/IEducation

Before one is taught to measure conventional wisdom (whatever that means), ought children not be taught the scientific method properly, and thus can be able to grasp why the massive and overwhelming number of scientists (including ID superstar Michael Behe

Re:Evolution/IEducation

On the other hand you're using Wikipedia for definitions- which is a problem in and of itself since Wikipedia is just a collection of shared ignorance.

There is nothing wrong with using Wikipedia for definitions. Facts, ya, that can be a problem but defi

Good.

Enough said.

Simon

Allow me to be the first to say...

THANK GOD! :)

Thank God!!

It must have been devine intervention to get this sort of action in Utah, of all places.

saints preserve us

I found an article [deseretnews.com] that talks more about why Utah doesn't get up in arms about evolution. Here's a part of it:

Professor Duane Jeffery, a professor of biology at Brigham Young University, estimates that "probably 90 percent of people who are LDS think the church is against evolution. But they don't get upset about it being taught in public schools." The reason, he says, is the church seminary system, which provides junior high and high school students with a class period of religious instruction during school hours. "Most parents feel their religion is being take care of in seminary," Jeffery says. Conservative gadfly Gayle Ruzicka, president of the Utah Eagle Forum, sees it this way: "Utah's children, for the most part are taught by their parents that evolution is not correct science. The parents feel more control because they know they're teaching their children the truth at home." That truth, she says, is that "you are a child of God," a phrase that Mormons learn from the time they can talk, she says. "It's a year or two of learning about evolution vs. a lifetime of hearing that you are a child of God. Evolution just doesn't win out."

It looks like Utah doesn't feel threatened by teaching evolution because they have faith in what they believe (and what they learn in the seminary). I'd say that's a step in the right direction for seperation of church and state... that is assuming that these semenary classes aren't mandated.

Re:saints preserve us

This is precisely the best sort of argument against letting public schools teach children religion.

"How do you feel about having your child instructed in what's 'true' by a [Mormon/Muslim/Catholic/Protestant/Jew/Satanist] teacher?"

Smart religious people

Re:saints preserve us

"How do you feel about having your child instructed in what's 'true' by a [Mormon/Muslim/Catholic/Protestant/Jew/Satanist] teacher?"

Sure, as long as he's not Episcopalean.

Re:saints preserve us

I'm an atheist, and I think pretty much all religious belief is inherently irrational.

And I agree, GP is definitely flamebait. And remarkably stupid.

There have been lots of very smart people who have held religious beliefs. There are also lots of very

Re:Let's quote a non-authority who makes a wild gu

I'm going to make up my own number. 90 percent of LDS people don't know what their church's stand on evolution is.

I'd go even further and say that 90% of Mormons think they know the position of the church on evolution and they are wrong. Wrong in that the

Enough Tolerance

Mormon schools which don't pay taxes but do get public funding should not be allowed to teach children that a metaphysical spirit created the Universe, unless they teach that such a statement isn't science, isn't a fact, isn't a theory, and that most peopl

Re:Enough Tolerance

Does that include the metaphysical spirt known as "random mutation"?

Re:Enough Tolerance

Evolution has nothing to do with who or what created the universe. Evolution specifically does not explain how life began. I think that both sides are losing sight of what evolution really is.

"most people don't believe that it is literally true."
I think

Re:Enough Tolerance

What mormon schools are you referring to? The only mormon school I've ever heard of is Brigham Young University.

You forgot a few.

There is also BYU Idaho and BYU Hawaii and BYU Israel. That pretty much sums it up.

Re:Enough Tolerance

How many Utah public schools teach cosmology and biology according to Mormon, not scientific, principles?

None, as far as I know. Often our morality and thus school rules and such are informed by religious principles, but never science.

As someone else point

Looks like it had been defanged anyway.

From what I understand from the article, the bill had already been amended from its original form and only would have required teachers to state that "not all scientists agree about evolution or the origin of species" (which is technically true, though pot

Re:Looks like it had been defanged anyway.

From what I understand from the article, the bill had already been amended from its original form and only would have required teachers to state that "not all scientists agree about evolution or the origin of species" (which is technically true, though po

Your signature is interesting.

“Moral relativism” seeks to eliminate all meaningful definitions of “morality”.

“Moral relativism” is a redundant term. All morals are intrinsically relative to the people, times, and places from which they originate

I'm not really surprised

As a Mormon myself (but not raised in Utah, so I'm usually considered cool), I'm not surprised. Most LDS members that I know kind of shrug their shoulders at the whole "intelligent design" thing. Sure, we believe God had something to do with it, but we're a) not going to force it down someone else's throat, based on the 11th article of Faith:

11. We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

So the idea of making up a law saying "here's how it is, suckers! Believe this way!" is against the typical belief of "separation of church and state". (Granted, Utah is not a shining example of this all the time - see the liquer laws they have, but like I said, I don't live there).

Even if we believe that God had a hand in it, there's a lot of individual belief in how it happens. Was "Garden of Eden" a fable of sorts for early Isrealites since they wouldn't get "Well, God started the universe from the vacuum using a 20 dimensional algorithm that would solidify into 3 stable dimensions of space, 1 of time, and gravity with values X" - or was there a "snap of the fingers"? Some church authorities have given their opinions on it, but I've never seen an official "it was this and no other".

I'm more of a "what does it really matter in the grand scheme of things" anyway. i don't think God's going to ask me what I thought about "intelligent design" or "evolution" when I die - he's going to ask me about how I treated my wife, my children, my friends, my enemies, my coworkers, and others. So I believe in evolution - yes, the Darwin version - until a voice on high says something different. And even then, I'll check to make sure somebody didn't slip me some really interesting mushrooms - just in case.

Most of us like science - and yes, I even appreciate the ones that show my religion, like most others, is probably full of it. I just use the "South Park Mormon episode thought" about the whole thing.

Then, there's b) getting voted out of office. Remember the Dover school officials who decided to bring Intelligent Design to their schools - and the next election got voted out? Even in a Mormon state, all an opponent has to do is start up "You're trying to mix church and state? What are you doing?", and there are enough non-Mormons in the state to resonate with that, and enough Mormons who think about Illinois and how the state not doing their job in protecting *all* religions that their dander gets up.

Anyway - good move by the congress, by the majority whip who brought in an amendment that all but killed the bill, and to the folks who voted it down. As the article says - if a super conservative religious state like Utah won't approve it, there's probably hope for the rest of the country.

This is all just my opinion. I could be wrong. And I'm hardly a good example of Mormonism anyway - I tend to say "fuck" too much in company ;).

Re:I'm not really surprised

Even if we believe that God had a hand in it, there's a lot of individual belief in how it happens. Was "Garden of Eden" a fable of sorts for early Isrealites since they wouldn't get "Well, God started the universe from the vacuum using a 20 dimensional al

Re:I'm not really surprised

11. We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

Note that this does not grant anyone the right to not worship. It is

Re:I'm not really surprised

You have a moral responsibility not to force your beliefs down your own childs throat.

I think I have a moral responsibility to give my child the benefit of something that has done so much good for my life, and the lives of so many others I know.

In other news

In other news, Crest has fought off a push to include the following warning on their toothpaste tubes:
Only 9 out of 10 Dentists agree that flouride toothpaste reduce cavities. Since there are dissenting Dentists, you're probably better off gargling with Coke.

Where did Bill go?

But the bill died on a 46-to-28 vote in the Republican-controlled House after being amended by the majority whip, Stephen H. Urquhart, a Mormon

Now we must ask ourselves:

1) Did the Bill go to Heaven, Hell or Purgatory?
2) Did the Bill become rei

so

Can we once and for all put to rest the idea that Republicans are universally luddite anti-science morons? This is not news people, it simply confirms the fact that we are letting the fringes drive the debate and that's just stupid on OUR PART!

Please Stop Posting These

OK, this might get modded down, but I feel I have to say this.

It's really not a great idea to post these evolution debate storys. This story will generate a huge amount of comments as the creationists try and blast the boards with their nonsense. And I do not hesitate to call it that. Nonsense. Mod points will be burned, flames will fly, karma will be gained and lost again and again in the same comment.

The creationists are essentially trolls, who are given free reign in these sanctioned stories to start flame wars. I have no doubt that many creantionist comments simply are trolls, looking to start a nice hot flame war. They succeed every time.

It's all a waste. Slashdot is news for nerds. This is really a US centric debate, and quite a lot of the slashdot readership is simply not in any way interested in the current US culture war. Many find it completely perplexing, like a story you'd hear about people somewhere worshipping a kid with a tail. This creation thing is not really a science story and is more a (very US centric) culture and politics issue.

OK. I accept that in some cases, these evolution stories are quite relevant in a science context. But only when the evolution/creation "debate" is not itself core and main extent the story. Postings on the NASA PR's censoring of scientists I do want to hear about. That affected scientists, and was only a result of the evolution/creation "debate". Similarly with fuding cuts due to fallout from the issue.

But stories like these, which are not about science, and are simply about another aspect of a culture/political war going on in the US, do not belong in the science section. There's no science here. There isn't even a victory for science. It's just the outcome of one skirmish between religious groups and secular people in the US.

I accept that this may be an important issue for US slashdotters, but please understand that this is a very, very, very US centric story, that really belongs in the Slashdot politics section, not in the science section and certainly not on the main page.

Hopefully this comment might start a good meta discussion that the editors may take notice of. But more than likely it will simply be lost amid the vast torrent of comments, flames and threads surrounding it.

Re:Please Stop Posting These

Dude, your post is a complete mad-lib for each and every topic on Slashdot...or any web site anywhere. If you can't take the heat, click elsewhere.


It's really not a great idea to __[verb1]___ these ___[adj1]_____ stories. This story will generate a huge

Thank God!

Thank God they voted this down.

(Heheheh. Couldn't resist.)

I am an atheist.
I am an atheist!
God knows, I am an ATHEIST!!
-- Nikita Khrushchev

Re:Utah of all places!

It's hardly being "out-front" and rational when you're forced to reject ridiculous "legislation" because there's a sizeable number of people in your legislature who will actually bring such crap to a vote.

I'd argue that this puts Utah squarely in 49th pla

Re:Utah of all places!

Who would have thought it would take more than five posts to bring out the first prejudiced, anti-religion post on Slashdot?

Re:Utah of all places!

Are you that naive to think the parent's not thinking religion when he's slamming Utah?

Re:Utah of all places!

I don't think it was about protecting the minority. I think the majority voted against it in part because the majority educated Utahns would be against it. The LDS church isn't as anti-evolution as you might think.

Re:Utah of all places!

Here's an interesting comment on this point from the Salt Lake Tribune [sltrib.com].

"Some say that Mormonism, with its emphasis that all beings can progress toward higher planes of existence, before and after death, has a receptivity toward evolutionary thought that

Re:That's a heckuva thing to vote over.

Darwinism, when taken on itself, says the universe spontaniously came into existance for no reason whatsoever at all and that mankinds choices lead to his evolution,

Idiot - you have no idea what Darwinism is, or what modern evolutionary theory is for that matter.

Read The Origin of the Species and then come back and post. I have and therefore have a right to comment on Darwinism.

Get a clue.

Re:Religious Rotgut

It's always possible that "Intellegent Design" doesn't fit with Mormon theology. As a Mormon I can't possibly support this particular ideology of intelligent design, other than the title. Mormons do not believe in an ex-nihilo creation, but rather a more

Re:Religious Rotgut

I think that evolution should also be kept out, because it is also metaphysical and non-scientific (neither testable nor observable).

It's been tested. It's been observed. You're either in denial or ignorent.

You see, there is every bit the agenda on the part of evolutionists to take God out of society. I don't want to put God into society, just to let people decide for themselves.

I disagree. I think you do want to put God into society, and you have an agenda to force people to accept that God exists. To prove my theory, I will simple ask you that were you to have children, or if you already have had children, will you/have you instructed them religiously? If the answer is yes then you are a prosyletist.

The point is to stop teaching evolution as a fact, and not to teach complex theories to children who don't know what to do with them.

People around the world try and teach children the mysteries of transubstatiation, or ressurection, or eternity or some other such rubbish. These are, at the best of times, highly advanced intellectual concepts. Children should not be taught these complex theories as they don't know what to do with them. Plus, they aren't even fact, unlike evolution.

The attempts by many Christians to teach ID and creation are not intended to shun science or make second-class citizens out of atheists; it's just a reaction to what many view as being an untruthful, specifically anti-Christian approach.

Yes they are. And atheists are second class citizens. Unlike their religious "peers", their views and practices, no matter how outrageous, are not constitutionally protected. The Christain approach is the untruthful one. The religion is filled with lies, contridictions, falsehoods, evils and hate; yet to proslyetise and indoctrinate it is legally protected.

The truth is, you've been brainwashed by the village shamen or nearest cultural equivilant. Try not to subject your children to the same treatment. You only get so many of them.

Easy question

Why hasn't a new age of enlightenment kicked in?

Because most people are stupid?

What do I win?

Smartass comments aside, I think it's because there's just too much knowledge. It's painful trying to understand complex ideas, and the world is full of complex ideas. It's much simpler to embrace a simple viewpoint, one which will give you the answers you seek without requiring thought.

Consider simple moral questions. In the real world, moral judgements are sometimes difficult. By embracing a set of pre-written moral standards and applying them uncritically, life becomes much easier. "Homosexuality is wrong," and "Anyone who claims to believe in Jesus is right," or "The invisible hand of the market will make everything right!" Shades of grey are transformed instantly into wonderful black-and-white just by running it through your Jesus filter (or your Allah filter, or your Ayn Rand filter, or... you get the point).

I doubt we'll ever see a true age of enlightenment.