Scary: OK Approves Bill That Gives Passing Grade To All Faith-Based Responses

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
So much for studying for your science test.

Text

EDMOND? The Oklahoma House of Representatives Education Committee has just approved House Bill 2211. The bill is expected to pass the full House, and then to go to the Senate. Its authors describe it as promoting freedom of religion in the public schools. In fact, it does the opposite.

HB 2211 is identical to bills widely introduced into state legislatures across the nation, where they have met various fates. Texas?s Legislature passed it, and Texas is experiencing serious problems as a result. Liberty Legal Institute of Plano, Texas, a group of fundamentalist Christian lawyers, drafted the bill and promoted to legislatures, including Oklahoma?s. It was not written by its Oklahoma legislative ?authors.?

The bill requires public schools to guarantee students the right to express their religious viewpoints in a public forum, in class, in homework and in other ways without being penalized. If a student?s religious beliefs were in conflict with scientific theory, and the student chose to express those beliefs rather than explain the theory in response to an exam question, the student?s incorrect response would be deemed satisfactory, according to this bill.

The school would be required to reward the student with a good grade, or be considered in violation of the law. Even simple, factual information such as the age of the earth (4.65 billion years) would be subject to the student?s belief, and if the student answered 6,000 years based on his or her religious belief, the school would have to credit it as correct.
Science education becomes absurd under such a situation.

If a student chose to take his opportunity to speak to a group of students in a school-sanctioned assembly to tell them they must accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior or go to hell, then that student would have a right to do so, according to this bill. Especially, but not only if the student held a position of honor and authority (class officer, team captain), and was speaking in his or her official capacity, the school has clearly established religion in violation of both the U.S. and Oklahoma constitutions.

The same would be true if the student chose to tell the assembled students that they would not go to hell, that there is no hell and that those who promote belief in hell are liars. What if a Wican student chose to tell the assembled students that the only true God is Nature, or a member of a radical religious sect advocated assassination in order to preserve God?s will? According to this bill, those students would be free, in a forum supported by the school, to do so. Any or all of these scenarios would lead to lawsuits.

The consequence of the bill will be to create havoc and promote discord in the public schools. That?s already happening in Texas, where the bill has been law for several months. Denton, Texas Independent School District, responding to the law, has decreed that no students may ever speak in assembly, to graduation, to the crowd at an athletic event or in other group function. As reported in The Denton Record Chronicle Sept. 1, the superintendent there said if no students are ever allowed to speak, then there will be no discrimination and no basis for lawsuits. Another school superintendent in Texas said, ?? we?re just trying to have school, and I think this is a complicating factor? as reported by Americans United for Separation of Church and State, an organization that has spoken out against the bill.

What administrators fear as the law is implemented is a barrage of lawsuits. School administrators in Texas are frightened. They fear lawsuits from students who feel that the school is forcing them to endure religious activity they do not agree with nor want to have imposed on them. They also fear lawsuits from students who claim they have not been properly allowed the forum the law requires. They?ll be damned (or sued) if they do, damned (or sued) if they don?t. Oklahoma will experience the same.

Students already have the constitutional freedom to organize religious groups, to pray or to do whatever religious activity they want at school, so long as they do not impose that on others or use public resources to support their religion. This bill adds nothing in the way of religious freedom. What it will do is create a stew of undesirable litigation relating to an important constitutional issue ? separation of church and state.

Both The Oklahoma Academy of Science and Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education have asked for the bill?s defeat. I agree. Don?t we have better things to do with public money, than to give it to lawyers and courts over such matters?
 

MrChad

Lifer
Aug 22, 2001
13,507
3
81
Even simple, factual information such as the age of the earth (4.65 billion years) would be subject to the student?s belief, and if the student answered 6,000 years based on his or her religious belief, the school would have to credit it as correct.

Perhaps educators can improve the phrasing of their questions. Instead of "What is the age of the earth?", one could say "According to most radiometric dating studies, what is the age of the earth?". That eliminates the ambiguity that allows conflicting faith-based answers, and it does not infringe upon anyone's personal beliefs.
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
61,964
17,733
136
Hurrah for religious zealotry gone too far!
If you want your kid to have a faith-centered education, send them to an appropriate school for it, or handle that part of it yourself at home.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,395
8,552
126
we've also got english teachers administering the state's physical fitness exams in high school
 

GasX

Lifer
Feb 8, 2001
29,033
6
81
Originally posted by: MrChad
Even simple, factual information such as the age of the earth (4.65 billion years) would be subject to the student?s belief, and if the student answered 6,000 years based on his or her religious belief, the school would have to credit it as correct.

Perhaps educators can improve the phrasing of their questions. Instead of "What is the age of the earth?", one could say "According to most radiometric dating studies, what is the age of the earth?". That eliminates the ambiguity that allows conflicting faith-based answers, and it does not infringe upon anyone's personal beliefs.

I like that. That way you could still penalize the f-tards who say 6000 years old.
 

jagec

Lifer
Apr 30, 2004
24,442
6
81
Originally posted by: MrChad
Even simple, factual information such as the age of the earth (4.65 billion years) would be subject to the student?s belief, and if the student answered 6,000 years based on his or her religious belief, the school would have to credit it as correct.

Perhaps educators can improve the phrasing of their questions. Instead of "What is the age of the earth?", one could say "According to most radiometric dating studies, what is the age of the earth?". That eliminates the ambiguity that allows conflicting faith-based answers, and it does not infringe upon anyone's personal beliefs.

yup. Otherwise all the kids will just make up stuff because they're too lazy to study.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Originally posted by: MrChad
Even simple, factual information such as the age of the earth (4.65 billion years) would be subject to the student?s belief, and if the student answered 6,000 years based on his or her religious belief, the school would have to credit it as correct.

Perhaps educators can improve the phrasing of their questions. Instead of "What is the age of the earth?", one could say "According to most radiometric dating studies, what is the age of the earth?". That eliminates the ambiguity that allows conflicting faith-based answers, and it does not infringe upon anyone's personal beliefs.

Kinda like this? blonde geometry

 

Jeff7

Lifer
Jan 4, 2001
41,596
19
81
Originally posted by: MrChad
Even simple, factual information such as the age of the earth (4.65 billion years) would be subject to the student?s belief, and if the student answered 6,000 years based on his or her religious belief, the school would have to credit it as correct.

Perhaps educators can improve the phrasing of their questions. Instead of "What is the age of the earth?", one could say "According to most radiometric dating studies, what is the age of the earth?". That eliminates the ambiguity that allows conflicting faith-based answers, and it does not infringe upon anyone's personal beliefs.
"Radiometric dating is the work of Satan, trying to fool us with false data."


Is it science class? Fine. Keep science in the science class. Religion doesn't belong there.
 

mrSHEiK124

Lifer
Mar 6, 2004
11,488
2
0
Originally posted by: Mwilding
Originally posted by: MrChad
Even simple, factual information such as the age of the earth (4.65 billion years) would be subject to the student?s belief, and if the student answered 6,000 years based on his or her religious belief, the school would have to credit it as correct.

Perhaps educators can improve the phrasing of their questions. Instead of "What is the age of the earth?", one could say "According to most radiometric dating studies, what is the age of the earth?". That eliminates the ambiguity that allows conflicting faith-based answers, and it does not infringe upon anyone's personal beliefs.

I like that. That way you could still penalize the f-tards who say 6000 years old.

Ditto, I like it too.
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
65,985
14,383
146
"Billy-Bob, what is 2+1?"

"Teechur, my Daddy sez it's Heaven, but my momma sez he's goin to hell fer that. Why?"
 
Oct 25, 2006
11,036
11
91
My Biology teacher told me that there was a story of a guy who put down that he couldn't answer the question on evolution on the AP exam because of his religious beliefs. Nevertheless, Jesus didn't help him there.
 

tasmanian

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 2006
3,811
1
0
Awesome so you could say you had a vision of jesus telling you the answers to the quiz. Then you cant get any wrong.
 

Mean MrMustard

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2001
3,144
10
81
I sense the ACLU licking their chops waiting for someone to sue the school system when their kid gets a failing grade for referencing the FSM or some other "unchristian" religion.
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
33,119
12,529
136
you gotta be fvckin kidding me. normally i don't get bent out of shape by religion.. but dear god, being 1000% more PC is going TOO FAR. faith is one thing, but science is FACT, NOT BELIEF.

more proof that america is going down the sh!tter :|
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
Originally posted by: jpeyton
So much for studying for your science test.

Text

EDMOND? The Oklahoma House of Representatives Education Committee has just approved House Bill 2211. The bill is expected to pass the full House, and then to go to the Senate. Its authors describe it as promoting freedom of religion in the public schools. In fact, it does the opposite.

HB 2211 is identical to bills widely introduced into state legislatures across the nation, where they have met various fates. Texas?s Legislature passed it, and Texas is experiencing serious problems as a result. Liberty Legal Institute of Plano, Texas, a group of fundamentalist Christian lawyers, drafted the bill and promoted to legislatures, including Oklahoma?s. It was not written by its Oklahoma legislative ?authors.?

The bill requires public schools to guarantee students the right to express their religious viewpoints in a public forum, in class, in homework and in other ways without being penalized. If a student?s religious beliefs were in conflict with scientific theory, and the student chose to express those beliefs rather than explain the theory in response to an exam question, the student?s incorrect response would be deemed satisfactory, according to this bill.

The school would be required to reward the student with a good grade, or be considered in violation of the law. Even simple, factual information such as the age of the earth (4.65 billion years) would be subject to the student?s belief, and if the student answered 6,000 years based on his or her religious belief, the school would have to credit it as correct.
Science education becomes absurd under such a situation.

If a student chose to take his opportunity to speak to a group of students in a school-sanctioned assembly to tell them they must accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior or go to hell, then that student would have a right to do so, according to this bill. Especially, but not only if the student held a position of honor and authority (class officer, team captain), and was speaking in his or her official capacity, the school has clearly established religion in violation of both the U.S. and Oklahoma constitutions.

The same would be true if the student chose to tell the assembled students that they would not go to hell, that there is no hell and that those who promote belief in hell are liars. What if a Wican student chose to tell the assembled students that the only true God is Nature, or a member of a radical religious sect advocated assassination in order to preserve God?s will? According to this bill, those students would be free, in a forum supported by the school, to do so. Any or all of these scenarios would lead to lawsuits.

The consequence of the bill will be to create havoc and promote discord in the public schools. That?s already happening in Texas, where the bill has been law for several months. Denton, Texas Independent School District, responding to the law, has decreed that no students may ever speak in assembly, to graduation, to the crowd at an athletic event or in other group function. As reported in The Denton Record Chronicle Sept. 1, the superintendent there said if no students are ever allowed to speak, then there will be no discrimination and no basis for lawsuits. Another school superintendent in Texas said, ?? we?re just trying to have school, and I think this is a complicating factor? as reported by Americans United for Separation of Church and State, an organization that has spoken out against the bill.

What administrators fear as the law is implemented is a barrage of lawsuits. School administrators in Texas are frightened. They fear lawsuits from students who feel that the school is forcing them to endure religious activity they do not agree with nor want to have imposed on them. They also fear lawsuits from students who claim they have not been properly allowed the forum the law requires. They?ll be damned (or sued) if they do, damned (or sued) if they don?t. Oklahoma will experience the same.

Students already have the constitutional freedom to organize religious groups, to pray or to do whatever religious activity they want at school, so long as they do not impose that on others or use public resources to support their religion. This bill adds nothing in the way of religious freedom. What it will do is create a stew of undesirable litigation relating to an important constitutional issue ? separation of church and state.

Both The Oklahoma Academy of Science and Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education have asked for the bill?s defeat. I agree. Don?t we have better things to do with public money, than to give it to lawyers and courts over such matters?

Unbelievable. Everyone associated with putting this bill into play should be publicly executed. I'll bring the popcorn.
 

SparkyJJO

Lifer
May 16, 2002
13,357
7
81
Considering that we don't know for sure how old the earth is, I see no problem.

Half the "science" out there regarding stuff that may conflict with religious beliefs is a lot of guesswork anyway, no hard facts for it. Evolution for example, it has never been proven, it is just a theory. So why teach a theory as fact? Shouldn't be.
 
Jan 18, 2001
14,465
1
0
Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
Considering that we don't know for sure how old the earth is, I see no problem.

Half the "science" out there regarding stuff that may conflict with religious beliefs is a lot of guesswork anyway, no hard facts for it. Evolution for example, it has never been proven, it is just a theory. So why teach a theory as fact? Shouldn't be.

epic fail