Tennessee Evolution Bill Becomes Law

[Texashiker]

I do not understand what the big deal is with this law?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/10/tennessee-evolution-bill-haslam_n_1416015.html

A Tennessee bill meant to protect teachers who allow students to question and criticize "controversial" subjects such as evolution and climate change became law on Tuesday after Gov. Bill Haslam (R) declined to act.

Why should schools be allowed to force feed students information? Isn't the purpose of schools to foster the ability of free and abstract thought?

When a scientist publishes a study, other scientist are free to criticize the results of the study. So why aren't students allowed the same freedoms?

Why is there a fear of students asking questions?

The answer to me anyway, is that the education system does not want students asking questions. The education system as a whole wants to be able to force feed students information, and the students not have the ability to question anything.

 

[fskimospy]

I do not understand what the big deal is with this law?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/10/tennessee-evolution-bill-haslam_n_1416015.html



Why should schools be allowed to force feed students information? Isn't the purpose of schools to foster the ability of free and abstract thought?

When a scientist publishes a study, other scientist are free to criticize the results of the study. So why aren't students allowed the same freedoms?

Why is there a fear of students asking questions?

The answer to me anyway, is that the education system does not want students asking questions. The education system as a whole wants to be able to force feed students information, and the students not have the ability to question anything.

Because it is providing a mechanism for teachers to teach creationism and other pseudoscience in the classroom. One purpose of schools is most certainly to promote free thinking, but another purpose of schools is to provide accurate information. Creationism is a religious origins myth that is entirely unsupported by science. Providing protection for people who want to teach unsupported, unscientific theories is silliness.

This bill will likely be found unconstitutional anyway.

 

[Ausm]

I do not understand what the big deal is with this law?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/10/tennessee-evolution-bill-haslam_n_1416015.html



Why should schools be allowed to force feed students information? Isn't the purpose of schools to foster the ability of free and abstract thought?

When a scientist publishes a study, other scientist are free to criticize the results of the study. So why aren't students allowed the same freedoms?

Why is there a fear of students asking questions?

The answer to me anyway, is that the education system does not want students asking questions. The education system as a whole wants to be able to force feed students information, and the students not have the ability to question anything.

Somehow I do not find this surprising.

 

[rudder]

Why is there a fear of students asking questions?

One example... cause my wife is a teacher... In 2008 my wife answered a question about the presidential election. Two days later she was called into a meeting with the principal and a parent who was upset that my wife said obama was a baby killer. Apparently everyone took the word of an 8 year old.

Along those lines... parents can be dicks about certain subjects being brought up in a school setting. My opinion is it is a big world and students needs to be exposed... just as long as teachers don't pimp their personal views.

Teachers have to be overly cautious these days when anything of this nature is mentioned.

 

[monovillage]

You are not allowed to question dogma, least of all in places of education. It is forbidden.

 

[Ausm]

One example... cause my wife is a teacher... In 2008 my wife answered a question about the presidential election. Two days later she was called into a meeting with the principal and a parent who was upset that my wife said obama was a baby killer. Apparently everyone took the word of an 8 year old.

Along those lines... parents can be dicks about certain subjects being brought up in a school setting. My opinion is it is a big world and students needs to be exposed... just as long as teachers don't pimp their personal views.

Teachers have to be overly cautious these days when anything of this nature is mentioned.

That's because he isn't and abortions are legal...time get over it and move on.

 

[Paul98]

It's not because of students asking questions, students should be asking questions about these things so that they actually understand them if they can.

The problem is most likely that it may allow idiotic teachers to lead students to not believe in evolution. The students are there to learn, and should have questions. These teachers should be teaching the science on these subjects which leads you to at least believing in the facts of evolution. The main things that lead to doubts in evolution are due to not understanding even basics.

 

[Ausm]

You are not allowed to question dogma, least of all in places of education. It is forbidden.

Because dogma is Fiction.

 

[rudder]

Because it is providing a mechanism for teachers to teach creationism and other pseudoscience in the classroom. One purpose of schools is most certainly to promote free thinking, but another purpose of schools is to provide accurate information. Creationism is a religious origins myth that is entirely unsupported by science. Providing protection for people who want to teach unsupported, unscientific theories is silliness.

This bill will likely be found unconstitutional anyway.

Not so in Tennessee anyway. Teachers are pretty restricted to sticking to published state standards. Tenure protections have been removed so a teachers job will be on the line if they decide to go off and teach creationism... not that this was ever a problem in the past.

 

[fskimospy]

Not so in Tennessee anyway. Teachers are pretty restricted to sticking to published state standards. Tenure protections have been removed so a teachers job will be on the line if they decide to go off and teach creationism... not that this was ever a problem in the past.

Uhmm, isn't that what this bill is about? Protecting teachers who decide to go off and teach 'alternative' theories, ie: creationism?

 

[Texashiker]

Because it is providing a mechanism for teachers to teach creationism and other pseudoscience in the classroom. One purpose of schools is most certainly to promote free thinking, but another purpose of schools is to provide accurate information. Creationism is a religious origins myth that is entirely unsupported by science. Providing protection for people who want to teach unsupported, unscientific theories is silliness.

Since we are always learning and new information is being discovered, should anything be taught in schools? Besides math that is.

For example - science barely understands how viruses like HIV work, so should schools teach students about HIV?

Science is still discovering new forms of pre-humans. Since we do not have a clear picture of evolution, should evolution be taught in school?

Shouldn't students be allowed to question what science perceives as "fact"?

Look at what happened with the discovery of java man. The scientific community rejected java man for 20+ years?

If the scientific community can reject discoveries, why shouldn't students be allowed to question current theories?

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Since we are always learning and new information is being discovered, should anything be taught in schools? Besides math that is.

For example - science barely understands how viruses like HIV work, so should schools teach students about HIV?

Science is still discovering new forms of pre-humans. Since we do not have a clear picture of evolution, should evolution be taught in school?

Shouldn't students be allowed to question what science perceives as "fact"?

Look at what happened with the discovery of java man. The scientific community rejected java man for 20+ years?

This is among the most ignorant posts I've ever read. I don't think you understand anything about science, at all.

 

[fskimospy]

Since we are always learning and new information is being discovered, should anything be taught in schools? Besides math that is.

For example - science barely understands how viruses like HIV work, so should schools teach students about HIV?

Science is still discovering new forms of pre-humans. Since we do not have a clear picture of evolution, should evolution be taught in school?

Shouldn't students be allowed to question what science perceives as "fact"?

Look at what happened with the discovery of javaman. The scientific community rejected javaman for 20+ years?

I seriously don't understand how you think these things are the same as creationism.

Incomplete knowledge is not the same as teaching entirely unsupported creation myths as science.

Students are already allowed to question whatever they want. Teachers however should be required to teach science in science class. Creationism and intelligent design are not actually credible scientific theories, so they should not be taught in science class.

 

[Texashiker]

This is among the most ignorant posts I've ever read. I don't think you understand anything about science, at all.

I understand that science is always changing. What the scientific community rejects today, might be accepted as fact tomorrow.

Since the scientific community is always changing, why shouldn't students be allowed to ask questions?

Why should the scientific community be allowed to force feed our education system, and we blindly accept what we are told?

 

[airdata]

Things have changed with the internet.

Kids are in a position now to simply point, click, and prove certain things to be BS. People who don't want evolution and other science material taught in school should send their kids to a christian school or something.

 

[Vic Vega]

...

 

[PokerGuy]

I am 100% against teaching creationism or any other non-science in science classes. When I first heard about this bill I thought "oh boy, the fundies have created some wacky bill to back-door teach religion". When I read the actual bill though, it's really much to do about nothing.

Here's the actual bill: http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/107/Bill/HB0368.pdf

It's very short, and the only sections that really do anything are these

(c) The state board of education, public elementary and secondary school governing authorities, directors of schools, school system administrators, and public elementary and secondary school principals and administrators shall endeavor to assist teachers to find effective ways to present the science curriculum as it addresses scientific controversies. Toward this end, teachers shall be permitted to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught.
(d) Neither the state board of education, nor any public elementary or secondary school governing authority, director of schools, school system administrator, or any public elementary or secondary school principal or administrator shall prohibit any teacher in a public school system of this state from helping students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught.

If there is something out of line with those sections, I don't see it.

 

[monovillage]

Because dogma is Fiction.

What makes you think that's always true? It isn't btw.

dog·ma
noun \ˈdȯg-mə, ˈdäg-\
plural dog·mas also dog·ma·ta
Definition of DOGMA
1
a : something held as an established opinion; especially : a definite authoritative tenet b : a code of such tenets <pedagogical dogma> c : a point of view or tenet put forth as authoritative without adequate grounds
2
: a doctrine or body of doctrines concerning faith or morals formally stated and authoritatively proclaimed by a church

 

[Ausm]

What makes you think that's always true? It isn't btw.

Sorry more specifically ALL RELIGIOUS Dogma is Fiction.

 

[Paul98]

Since we are always learning and new information is being discovered, should anything be taught in schools? Besides math that is.

For example - science barely understands how viruses like HIV work, so should schools teach students about HIV?

Science is still discovering new forms of pre-humans. Since we do not have a clear picture of evolution, should evolution be taught in school?

Shouldn't students be allowed to question what science perceives as "fact"?

Look at what happened with the discovery of java man. The scientific community rejected java man for 20+ years?

They should question if they don't understand something. But before they questions if the science is correct or not you need to fully understand the science behind it. These students are not going to have the understanding on a subject to make any claims on the science because they are learning only the basics. Plus the teachers unless they have a masters in the subject they are teaching most likely don't have the knowledge on the subject ether.


This is where we get the problem of people thinking evolution is a controversy. It's not, it's a fact that it happens, and we see it all the time. If you don't believe or think there is something wrong in a certain part of evolution you are perfectly fine asking a question or looking for an answer to your question.


I see this all the time, someone doesn't understand something. But instead of thinking that they are wrong they say that there is something wrong with this or that and here is why. Instead of asking a question on what they don't understand. You aren't special, your question is obvious and has been asked millions of times before and the answer is this.

 

[woolfe9999]

I am 100% against teaching creationism or any other non-science in science classes. When I first heard about this bill I thought "oh boy, the fundies have created some wacky bill to back-door teach religion". When I read the actual bill though, it's really much to do about nothing.

Here's the actual bill: http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/107/Bill/HB0368.pdf

It's very short, and the only sections that really do anything are these

If there is something out of line with those sections, I don't see it.

Thanks for posting the text. Who knows what the hell it even means. I fail to see the point of passing legislation this vague.

 

[jhbball]

Since we are always learning and new information is being discovered, should anything be taught in schools? Besides math that is.

For example - science barely understands how viruses like HIV work, so should schools teach students about HIV?

Science is still discovering new forms of pre-humans. Since we do not have a clear picture of evolution, should evolution be taught in school?

Shouldn't students be allowed to question what science perceives as "fact"?

Look at what happened with the discovery of java man. The scientific community rejected java man for 20+ years?

If the scientific community can reject discoveries, why shouldn't students be allowed to question current theories?

herp derp.

 

[Ausm]

Thanks for posting the text. Who knows what the hell it even means. I fail to see the point of passing legislation this vague.

To purposely leave the door wide open so people can interpret the laws whatever way suites them?

 

[fskimospy]

I am 100% against teaching creationism or any other non-science in science classes. When I first heard about this bill I thought "oh boy, the fundies have created some wacky bill to back-door teach religion". When I read the actual bill though, it's really much to do about nothing.

Here's the actual bill: http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/107/Bill/HB0368.pdf

It's very short, and the only sections that really do anything are these

If there is something out of line with those sections, I don't see it.

Because I guarantee you that it will be used to teach creationism. The 'strengths and weaknesses' tactic is an old one by creationists. Teachers are already permitted to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of scientific theories so long as they do so in a manner consistent with science and best practices. This is providing an extra layer of protection so that teachers will no longer need to adhere to such standards while critiquing evolution, and it's doing so specifically due to the fact that creationism cannot be argued for using science.

It's just part of a continuing effort by people to force their religion on others.

 

[woolfe9999]

To purposely leave the door wide open so people can interpret the laws whatever way suites them?

Quite possibly. That bill presents a nightmare of interpretation for the courts if any legal action ensues where its meaning is critical. For example, it says teachers can't be prevented from helping students critique scientific theories "in an objective manner." What the hell does that mean?