Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Education Science

Kentucky Lawmakers Shocked To Find Evolution In Biology Tests 1218

Posted by Soulskill
from the other-states-shocked-that-kentucky-has-biology-tests dept.
bbianca127 writes "Kentucky mandated that schools include tests that are based on national standards, and contracted test maker ACT to handle them. Legislators were then shocked that evolution was so prominently featured, even though evolution is well-supported and a central tenet of modern biology. One KY Senator said he wanted creationism taught alongside evolution, even though the Supreme Court has ruled that teaching creationism in science classes is a violation of the establishment clause. Representative Ben Wade stated that evolution is just a theory, and that Darwin made it all up. Legislators want ACT to make a Kentucky-specific ACT test, though the test makers say that would be prohibitively expensive. This is just the latest in a round of states' fight against evolution — Louisiana and Tennessee have recently passed laws directed against teaching evolution."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Kentucky Lawmakers Shocked To Find Evolution In Biology Tests

Comments Filter:
  • Ummm....no (Score:5, Insightful)

    by crazyjj (2598719) * on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:15AM (#41024693)

    Legislators want ACT to make a Kentucky-specific ACT test

    Sorry, hillbillies. We're not making a separate test for you just because you're a bunch of bible-thumping idiots. We're also not making a separate test for Muslims which women are forbidden to take, or a separate Scientology test with science questions involving Thetan levels, or a separate test for North Koreans where the correct answer to every question is A. Our Supreme Leader, Praised Be His Name!

    Everyone gets the same test (well, okay, we can do braille and language translations, but THAT'S IT). And studying for it is going to involve reading more than the Bible, or Koran, or Talmud, or whatever the fuck holy text you happen to be thumping.

    Besides, you need real science in Kentucky. That meth isn't going to cook itself, you know.

    • Moral Orel (Score:5, Funny)

      by Sponge Bath (413667) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:36AM (#41024995)

      We're not making a separate test for you...

      Orel and his friend Doughy are walking back from school:

      Doughy: Orel, what was your answer for question number three of the science test?
      Orel: Jesus!
      Doughy: [slaps forehead] Of course!

    • by swschrad (312009) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:37AM (#41025007) Homepage Journal

      if you are so all-fired to exclude scientific thought, send your kids to church school. as for everybody else, they should be exposed to the real world and all its swirling contradictions through a broad-based education.

      following fruit fly genes is not going to damn you to hell everlasting, for God made that mechanism. pinheads.

    • Re:Ummm....no (Score:5, Insightful)

      by residieu (577863) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:44AM (#41025103)

      These are tests to give to High School students as part of their lessons, right? Kentucky isn't actually suggesting that the ACT tests widely used for college admissions be rewritten for them, are they? If they're asking for Kentucky-specific tests for their classes, I wouldn't have a problem with ACT writing them for them. Kentucky WOULD have to expect a pretty hefty cost to finance writing of new tests with a limited audience (But it sounds like ACT isn't willing to do that work, or doesn't think Kentucky would be willing to pay the necessary price, fair enough).

      If they ARE talking about the college-admissions ACT tests.... well, I'd be willing to bet very few schools would be willing to accept those alternate test for admissions.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:15AM (#41024697)

    Can't we just cut the south free and stop talking about them? They are a money drain on this country, and I am sick of hearing about them. Hell, I have family in the south. All they ever talk about is how Obama is a muslim and how his birth certificate is a fake. The south is too resilient to progress. We would be better off without them slowing us down.

    • by crazyjj (2598719) * on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:18AM (#41024729)

      Kentucky was a Union state. You're stuck with them either way.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:20AM (#41024741)

        The ignorance infection is growing. We need to cut off the dead tissue as soon as possible.

      • by perpenso (1613749) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:33AM (#41024953)

        Kentucky was a Union state. You're stuck with them either way.

        Kentucky was claimed by both the Union and the Confederacy. Parts of the state actively supported the Union, other parts actively supported the Confederacy. Similar story when you get to individuals. Kentucky being considered a Union state is literally one of those instances where the victor gets to write history.

        Missouri had a similar split and the results were particularly bloody guerilla raids by small local groups. Similar problems may have occurred in Kentucky, I'm not familiar with what happened there.

        Virginia split in two, West Virginia exists because locals went Union.

        • by Hatta (162192) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:52AM (#41025249) Journal

          Parts of the state actively supported the Union, other parts actively supported the Confederacy. Similar story when you get to individuals.

          Which part of the individual supported the Union, and which parts supported the Confederacy?

        • by Antipater (2053064) on Friday August 17, 2012 @12:10PM (#41025535)

          Kentucky was much less of a bloody affair than Missouri was. There were pro-South guerillas, but not in significant numbers. In fact, when Confederate general Bragg invaded Tennessee and Kentucky in mid-1862, he brought along tens of thousands of rifles, hoping to arm thousands of Kentuckians who would rise up alongside him when they saw gray troops in their streets. He ended up carting nearly all of them back South three months later, an Army of Kentucky having never materialized.

          It also would have been impossible for the Union to simply have allowed Kentucky to split off. Militarily, the state was the key to the Ohio River valley. Had it seceded, it would have basically been a knife in the Union's armpit, poised to slice off the entire Midwest. Lincoln himself (paraphrase) said "I hope to have God on my side, but what I really need is Kentucky."

    • by characterZer0 (138196) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:56AM (#41025301)

      The idiocy is not only in the south. I was checking out the local private schools for my daughter in an upstate NY city of over 200,000 people. I asked the new principal at one of the Catholic schools what science curriculum they used. He said, "Well, you know, we teach the idea of evolution, but it is mostly religious based." That was the end of that visit.

  • :facepalm: (Score:5, Insightful)

    by reubenavery (1047008) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:18AM (#41024725)
    ugh.

    well, hey, cheer up everybody, we just landed the most awesomest rover evar on mars!

    and all the other sciency stuff we've been accomplishing...

    we're doing great.

    right?

    hello?
    • by snowraver1 (1052510) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:19AM (#41024737)
      Yea, but the only reason that rover ever made it to Mars is because I was praying it would.
    • Re::facepalm: (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:30AM (#41024919)

      Pay no attention to the troll submitting stories.
      Somewhere in America millions are doing something stupid. A percentage of these people are public figures and a percentage of those are in government. This is nothing. This isn't even news. This is a reporter somewhere with search program trolling the press releases and small-town papers for 'senator' & 'evolution'. Whatever turns up both phrases can be sold to someone.

  • by KingSkippus (799657) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:21AM (#41024767) Homepage Journal

    Please remember that when people talk about a "war" on religion, this is the kind of stuff they're referring to. Nobody credible is trying to prevent anyone from worshiping the god of your choice. However, there is a sizable contingent of religious people out there who think that religious "freedom" means the freedom for everyone to be Christian, and anything that interferes with that goal is (or should) violate the First Amendment.

    I never cease to be frustrated at people who wave the Constitution around and cry about how our freedom is being oppressed when it suits their ideological viewpoint, but then they pull stuff like this without seeing how much worse a violation of our liberty it is.

    Jefferson is still right. Separation of church and state, it's the only reasonable way to ensure our freedom. That includes keeping creationism in churches where it belongs and out of our schools.

    • by MickyTheIdiot (1032226) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:25AM (#41024813) Homepage Journal

      Freedom of religion comes to this in their eyes: we're free to agree with them. That's it.

      The biggest point of ignorance about this is that the freedom to believe what we want benefits THEM the most. If Christianity becomes the "official" religion in the U.S., the question immediately becomes *what* form of Christianity. We seen it this year with all the Babtists crying about Mormonism. Freedom religion is there because that type of battle doesn't end until there are two people.

      • by Daniel_Staal (609844) <DStaal@usa.net> on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:34AM (#41024969)

        Freedom religion is there because that type of battle doesn't end until there are two people.

        You are way to optimistic about how many people would be left.

      • by Shoten (260439) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:46AM (#41025145)

        This is best summed up by, oddly enough, a joke by Emo Philips...

        I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!"
        "Why shouldn't I?" he said.
        I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!"
        He said, "Like what?"
        I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?"
        He said, "Religious."
        I said, "Me too! Are you christian or buddhist?"
        He said, "Christian."
        I said, "Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?"
        He said, "Protestant."
        I said, "Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?"
        He said, "Baptist!"
        I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?"
        He said, "Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?"
        He said,"Reformed Baptist church of god!"
        I said, "Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?"
        He said, "Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!"
        I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off.

      • by Jason Levine (196982) on Friday August 17, 2012 @12:12PM (#41025561)

        Exactly. I've also heard these people claim that our country is really a Christian nation and that Christianity should be the official religion. They'll usually claim that the founding fathers were Christian and thus they obviously wanted the country run as a Christian theocracy... no reason why they'd want government and religion separate, right?

        Well, except for actual historical reasons such as persecution of those who don't follow the official State religion and government officials being in charge of where/how/when/who you worship. The latter should scare any religious person who previously wanted a religion to be the official state religion. Look at the tax code. Now imagine that, instead of describing how you paid Uncle Sam every year, it described how you worshiped God. Does anyone really think, if church-state separation were abolished, that *PRIESTS* would be making the rules? It would be politicians and bureaucrats. Likely with corporate lobbyist influence. (All hymns need to be registered with the RIAA's "Religious Melodies" department or else the church will be levied a $750 fine.)

        Disclosure: I'm Jewish so making the Official State Religion That Everyone Must Practice any form of Christianity would be bad for me. However, as I said above, I'd also be against the government making Judaism the official religion because *I* want to decide how I worship, not some government official. (So long as my worship doesn't infringe on someone else's rights, of course.)

    • Grrr... grammo (Score:5, Insightful)

      by KingSkippus (799657) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:25AM (#41024815) Homepage Journal

      Nobody credible is trying to prevent anyone from worshiping the god of their choice. Plenty of people would love to prevent everyone from worshiping the god of your choice, depending on exactly which god that is.

      You know that sinking feeling you get when you realize that your keys are in the car as you're closing the car door, but it's too late to stop the momentum of your arm to catch it? It's the same as that feeling I get when I click Submit and as the little spinner is spinning and the text is uploading, I realize, "Noooo!!! That's not what I meant!"

    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:28AM (#41024881)

      Creationsim does have a place in schools. When I was a senior in high school we had a class called "humanities." It was a class where we covered a bit of art and a bit of sociology. That's where it belongs. Teach the basic ideas behind the major religions and touch on their influence on the world stage.
       
      By doing this you start to open up a middle ground where people learn a bit about each other and their cultures. By closing out this kind of knowledge you're leaving a big gap for the fringe to fill and use against you. The more people we can get involved in this middle ground the smaller the fringe becomes. This will make them less powerful and easier to spot at a distance.
       
      Too many people want to fight tooth and nail instead of finding a common ground to work from. This is a waste of resources.

      • by sandytaru (1158959) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:33AM (#41024957) Journal
        I'd love to have a literature elective in high school called "Creation Stories and Mythology from Around the World." It could begin and end with Genesis, but also touch on everything from Coyote sneezing out mountains to examples of new creation stories from modern literature, as well as some of the more out-there science hypothesis such as multiverses and parallel dimensions, and how they are used in speculative fiction.
        • by Princeofcups (150855) <john@princeofcups.com> on Friday August 17, 2012 @12:14PM (#41025603) Homepage

          I'd love to have a literature elective in high school called "Creation Stories and Mythology from Around the World." It could begin and end with Genesis, but also touch on everything from Coyote sneezing out mountains to examples of new creation stories from modern literature, as well as some of the more out-there science hypothesis such as multiverses and parallel dimensions, and how they are used in speculative fiction.

          I went to a Jesuit high school, and that is pretty much what we were taught. There's a reason that the Jesuits are feared by other Christians. Many are prominent scientists.

      • by Nadaka (224565) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:44AM (#41025105)

        Creationism would only have a place in a class that also taught about zeus impregnating goats, cutting out peoples hearts on top of a stepped pyramid for a good harvest and the blue skinned transgendered 8 armed gods.

      • by kurzweilfreak (829276) <kurzweilfreak@g3.14159mail.com minus pi> on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:49AM (#41025207) Journal
        No one would have a problem with that. The problem is that creationists think that somehow their worldview is legitimate science, and they are trying to push this into science classes. Not humanities classes. Not comparative religion classes. They don't want people to look at their creationism as religion. They want people to see that their religious beliefs are backed by science.

        This all ties into the religious meme of "get them hooked while they're young and too dumb to understand". If these creationists were really concerned with science rather than child indoctrination, they would be trying to push their agenda upon science organizations and research groups. Obviously, they would be laughed out of the building if they tried that, so they take their batshit public and try to create a non-existent controversy. They cry "teach the controversy!" and appeal to "academic freedom", which appeals to the sense of freedom of Americans in general.

        • by Nadaka (224565) on Friday August 17, 2012 @12:12PM (#41025563)

          Some people WOULD have a problem with that. It is explicitly the agenda of some of these people to prevent children from learning how to think for themselves.

          http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2012/aug/11/gail-collins/gail-collins-says-texas-gop-platform-calls-schools/

    • by zzsmirkzz (974536) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:33AM (#41024955)

      However, there is a sizable contingent of religious people out there who think that religious "freedom" means the freedom for everyone to be Christian, and anything that interferes with that goal is (or should) violate the First Amendment.

      Not exactly. They think religious "freedom" means that they have the freedom to teach their kids to believe whatever they want (which is true). But further than that they think it means that they are free from anyone else contradicting those beliefs with their own beliefs which is where they are wrong, they have no so such freedom as it, obviously, severely restricts everyone else's freedom to say and believe what they wish.

    • by cpghost (719344) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:35AM (#41024975) Homepage

      Jefferson is still right. Separation of church and state, it's the only reasonable way to ensure our freedom. That includes keeping creationism in churches where it belongs and out of our schools.

      Now, if only the US government stopped supporting the Islamist takeover of Syria, Egypt etc..., if only the Russian government stopped supporting the oppressive Orthodox Church of Russia against a couple of harmless girls... Separation of Church and State isn't very much en vogue nowadays; no matter where you look. That's really depressing, IMHO.

    • by smooth wombat (796938) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:35AM (#41024993) Homepage Journal
      religious "freedom" means the freedom for everyone to be Christian, and anything that interferes with that goal is (or should) violate the First Amendment.

      Or, as Asimov said:

      Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.
    • by dkleinsc (563838) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:43AM (#41025101) Homepage

      Also important to point out: Yes, Thomas Jefferson really supported religious freedom. As did John Adams, Sam Adams, Thomas Paine, James Madison, George Washington, Ben Franklin, and most of the rest of that crowd. They did so in part because they wanted to avoid all the religious wars which were common in Europe at the time. 20 years later, they were still writing letters to each other about how great an idea it had turned out to be, and de Tocqueville commented that it had led to a flourishing of religion in the US, which statistically speaking has continued through to the present day.

      The reason I bring this up is that David Barton and others like him have been busily rewriting American history to convince these nutjobs that the Establishment Clause should be ignored and Christianity be given a privileged place in the United States.

      • by gman003 (1693318) on Friday August 17, 2012 @03:36PM (#41029317)

        Whenever someone yells at me about "the Founding Fathers" and "non-separation of church and state", I like to point out that Jefferson was basically an agnostic, and Ben Franklin took part in satanic orgies. If the yelling moron is a hardline Protestant, I try to remember which of them were Catholic (for some reason many of them consider "papists" to be worse than atheists, which still baffles me); if the yelling moron is Catholic, I point out that the majority of the Founding Fathers were protestant and that if they had meant to establish a national religion, it would not have been theirs.

        I also like bringing up the Treaty of Tripoli (from 179something), which not only claims absolutely that the US is not a Christian nation, but specifically that the United States has no problem with Islam. I point out that the attempt at the treaty was started by Washington himself, although it was Adams who signed it.

    • by residieu (577863) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:46AM (#41025143)
      And when they speak of "war on religion" they certainly don't mean people placing restrictions on where Islamic communities can build their Mosques or community centers. War on Religion specifically means getting in the way of Christians.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:22AM (#41024779)

    A few wealthy and modern cities surrounded by a huge sea of uneducated religious primitives with guns.

  • by m1ndcrash (2158084) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:22AM (#41024783)
    Gravity is a theory too, nobody tries to walk out of the window, Ben Wade.
  • by tbonefrog (739501) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:26AM (#41024823)

    Yep it's a challenge to live down here amongst the hillbillies. Tennessee's law actually doesn't mandate teaching creationism, it just prevents a teacher from getting into trouble for teaching alternative theories. As a substitute teacher (between software engineer gigs) I'm amassing age-appropriate clips from as many different religions and prehistoric traditions as I can find, so when the opportunity [resents itself, I'll be ready.

    It's terrible to see the country slide backward down the ladder of technological pre-eminence due to these wackos. Decades of badmouthing government are going to take a toll on us pretty soon.

    Note also that science shouldn't be taught as set in stone, either. There's a lot we don't know and kids enjoy comparing what was known to be true in my teenage years with what we know now.

    Not believing in evolution after you've seen DNA is like sticking to chopsticks after you've seen the fork, no offense intended.

  • by Nushio (951488) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:29AM (#41024905) Homepage

    I am a Catholic guy, but I wasn't raised in the U.S. view's of creationism vs evolution. I am Mexican, and here, they teach us evolution *with* creationism. At church.

    At school? They leave the God theories to the church. God has no business in the government schools, and teachers aren't nuns to be teaching kids about God anyway.

    The way the Saturday Church classes taught me was that God didn't just create Adam and Eve, but evolved species into Adam and Eve. A simple way to explain it is that God plays Spore on a very big supercomputer with high definition graphics.

    I don't get why Christians / Catholics get so pissy about Darwin being a theory and that a maker must've just spawned everything out of thin air. Both theories aren't mutually exclusive. The initial spores could've spawned out of thin air, then evolved into men and women.

    And don't get me started with the Big Bang / Genesis thing, as the idea of creating the universe in 7 days is just wrong, but if some dude was shown a fast-forwarded video of the big bang and saw (and wrote) about creation taking place in 7 days, well that'd be a misunderstanding, I think.

    • by vonhammer (992352) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:38AM (#41025013)

      Most Catholics I know have a similar, "moderate", background with respect to evolution. It's the Protestants that tend to be more fundamentalist and deny evolution. I believe the reason is that, historically, Catholicism has relied on church traditions for its belief system. When the Protestants broke away they needed new source material to justify their path to God, so they turned to the Bible. This propelled them on a course that adheres more to the Bible (and its ancient science).

    • by aepervius (535155) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:41AM (#41025071)
      Litteralism and creationism were long abandonned by mainstream catholic, hundred of years ago in europe. If you ask an european catholic he will probably tell you all those stuff including the eve story are jsut that, allegories, and that evolution happened. Both of those phenomenon (litteralism and creationism) are predominentely american phenomenon among christian (rather than protestan/catholic). In fact if I recall correctely they can be traced back to end of 18th start of 19th century in north america.
    • by Colonel Korn (1258968) on Friday August 17, 2012 @12:11PM (#41025555)

      I am a Catholic guy, but I wasn't raised in the U.S. view's of creationism vs evolution. I am Mexican, and here, they teach us evolution *with* creationism. At church.

      At school? They leave the God theories to the church. God has no business in the government schools, and teachers aren't nuns to be teaching kids about God anyway.

      The way the Saturday Church classes taught me was that God didn't just create Adam and Eve, but evolved species into Adam and Eve. A simple way to explain it is that God plays Spore on a very big supercomputer with high definition graphics.

      I don't get why Christians / Catholics get so pissy about Darwin being a theory and that a maker must've just spawned everything out of thin air. Both theories aren't mutually exclusive. The initial spores could've spawned out of thin air, then evolved into men and women.

      And don't get me started with the Big Bang / Genesis thing, as the idea of creating the universe in 7 days is just wrong, but if some dude was shown a fast-forwarded video of the big bang and saw (and wrote) about creation taking place in 7 days, well that'd be a misunderstanding, I think.

      I went to a Catholic school where evolution was taught (by priests) as fact and creationism as metaphor. It wasn't until college that I realized this was a peculiarity caused by my school being run by Jesuits in western America.

    • by sribe (304414) on Friday August 17, 2012 @12:41PM (#41026153)

      I don't get why Christians / Catholics get so pissy about Darwin being a theory and that a maker must've just spawned everything out of thin air. Both theories aren't mutually exclusive.

      Catholics??? I thought this particular brand of nutbaggery was strictly a Protestant thing. After all the Pope has gone on record as saying there is no conflict between the theory of evolution and Catholic teachings.

  • by erikwestlund (1003368) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:33AM (#41024945) Homepage

    Imagine the analogies section:

    Creationism : True ::

    A) Science : Real
    B) Evolution : False
    C) Blacks : First-class Citizens
    D) Education : Important

    Guess the correct answer.

  • by moonwatcher2001 (2710261) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:35AM (#41024985)
    Gravity is just a theory. They need to teach "Intelligent Falling" in KY. Students need to know that objects fall because the Flying Spaghetti Monster pushes them down with it's noodley apendages.
  • by Skuld-Chan (302449) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:37AM (#41025001)

    Doesn't mean it isn't true.

    Theories make all these electronics work, theories make radio/cellphones/broadcasting work. I took a weather class in college and found out there's three theories on why it rains.

    It still rains :).

  • by snaildarter (1143695) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:38AM (#41025027)

    Specifically, the term "creationism" is inadequate. What we really mean here is "Christian creationism." That puts a finer point on it, and lets everyone in the conversation know exactly what we mean. I think it even exposes the proponents of it to some enlightenment on what they're really saying.

    I think an argument has more weight when you say, "Do you mean to tell me that you want Christian creationism taught instead of evolution? Do you think other religions' creationist ideologies should be taught as well?"

    From now on, every time I get caught up in this argument, I will use the term, "Christian creationism," and not just "creationism."

  • by Velex (120469) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:42AM (#41025083) Journal

    Dear Ann Druyan, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and Seth MacFarlane,

    How can we speed up the production of Cosmos: A Space-Time Odyssey? Is there somewhere we can throw more money at it?

    Won't somebody think of the children?

    Thanks,
    A Very Concerned Human Being

  • by TheCarp (96830) <sjc@nospAm.carpanet.net> on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:46AM (#41025161) Homepage

    I fully support the RIGHT of these states to teach what they want, and even to ban the teaching of evolution. Its their lives, their children, their right.

    However, I would ask that my states rights be recognized too.... the right to consider high school diplomas from their state worthless and The right to not fund their educational process at all.

    I would be perfectly happy with such an arrangement.

  • Apologies (Score:5, Insightful)

    by valros (1741778) on Friday August 17, 2012 @11:52AM (#41025251)
    As someone from Kentucky, though I did not vote for them, I would like to apologize for allowing such imbeciles represent us. I wish them out of office as much as anyone else, perhaps moreso.
    • Re:Apologies (Score:5, Informative)

      by jbeaupre (752124) on Friday August 17, 2012 @01:58PM (#41027705)

      As someone also from Kentucky, I'm happy to point out that there don't seem to be very many of these guys. The article only mentions a couple.

      Everyone is getting upset that "Kentucky is demanding ..." No, just two whack jobs. The legislature hasn't done anything.

10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0.

Working...