South Carolina Education Committee Removes Evolution From Standards 665
Toe, The writes "The South Carolina Education Oversight Committee approved new science standards for students except for one clause: the one that involves the use of the phrase 'natural selection.' Sen. Mike Fair, R-Greenville, argued against teaching natural selection as fact, when he believes there are other theories students deserve to learn. Fair argued South Carolina's students are learning the philosophy of natural selection but teachers are not calling it such. He said the best way for students to learn is for the schools to teach the controversy. Hopefully they're going to teach the controversy of gravity and valence bonds too. After all, they're just theories."
Re:States Rights (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Evolution is a theory, but not "just a theory". (Score:4, Interesting)
Cool. Ham directly says he is not interested in truth, just belief and hence does not qualify as rational.
"War in Iraq is given by God" - S. Palin (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:SubjectsInCommentsAreStupid (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:States Rights (Score:4, Interesting)
Okay, then why send them to school at all? If I have to sit them down to teach them all the of scientific/mathematical.grammatical/literary/etc, the why the hell have an "outsourced" education system at all?
The education system should be teaching a defined framework of information across the board. It should not matter if you live in SC or NY, you should be learning the same fundamentals such as math, science, history and literature.
Re:States Rights (Score:4, Interesting)
>By your logic if we didn't introduce kids to things like nuclear technology in high school, no one would go into that field in college.
No. By his logic- if you don't teach them basic physics, hardly any of them would (or could) go into nuclear technology. Evolution is to modern biology exactly as basic Newtonian physics is to Nuclear Technology - the gateway you need to learn in school the very bottom-layer fundamental pieces of knowledge without which you'll never be able to understand or learn the rest.
Not to mention - that - by YOUR logic, we may as well scrap art, literature and music programs entirely - after all, very few students will approach them as a career. Yet we keep them - because the one student in the entire history of the school who falls in love with stories and grows up to be a Tolkien or an Asimov or a Vonnegut is worth about a billion times more to society than the cost of having a literature teacher in every school. The one who grows up to be a Picasso or a Dali changes how people see the world for ever. The one in the lifetime of a school who may become a Ronnie James Dio or an Otep Shamaya are worth it all by themselves.
And the argument for evolution is much, much stronger than that: evolution the ground-work class that starts of nearly the entire supply of medical researchers, zoologists, doctors - hell damn near everybody who in anyway works with biology.
Scrap it and you will limit your supply of students in these fields almost entirely to private school kids who had the class - and the one or two outliers who read books about it on their own time because of personal interest.
I know - I live in a country where until almost the end of my high-school career there was no separation of church and state, I went through a school system where evolution was little more than a swear word - and I saw the country that did the world's first heart transplant turn into one that had to import doctors from Cuba just to raise it's healthcare system to the level of "terrible".