Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Utah Can’t Even Get “Intelligent Design” Right

Senate Gives Final Passage to Evolution Theory Bill

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- The Senate on Monday gave final approval to an amended version of a bill that dictates what state science teachers can say about the origins of human life.


I know, it sounds bad, but look how they screwed it up:

But Sen. Curt Bramble, R-Provo, said his amendment "makes it clear that this is not a mandate," inserting the sentence "IF instruction IS GIVEN to students on any theory regarding the origins of life, or the origins or present state of the human race, THEN THAT INSTRUCTION shall stress that not all scientists agree on which theory is correct."


You would think, that if any state could write the perfect “I.D.” legislation to ruin science education, it would be Utah but, apparently, they can’t even get that right. The following editorial puts it rather well:

Not fit to survive: A bad bill was made even worse

Monday's amendment made the bill slightly less of a mandate by stating that the comforting (to some) fiction that evolution is anything other than the solid core of biological science need only be presented if a particular class deals with the origin of life or the origin of humans in their present form. Not enough to make it constitutional, but an improvement.
But Friday's change did what some of us thought was impossible. It took a false statement and made it even less true. By adding the word "scientific" at critical points, the bill stopped saying that there were other ideas about the origins and development of life on Earth and started saying that there were other "scientific" ways of explaining those things.
There are not.


It is unfortunate that that there are so few opponents of “I.D.” in Utah that the only anti-legislation editorial sounds like it came out of a highschool newspaper. He misses one important point. If the legislation is limited to ONLY the human species, how is it stand up in court? What valid reason could there possibly be for the disputed portion of evolution curriculum to be limited to only the human animal?

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home