Louisiana: Clearing the Way for Antievolution

This article points out what we knew from the outset, that the “academic freedom” law passed there was about nothing other than making it likely that teachers could adopt various of the standard religious antievolution arguments for classroom instruction. The state department of education had a policy that the board of education altered:

The section removed said: “Materials that teach creationism or intelligent design or that advance the religious belief that a supernatural being created humankind shall be prohibited for use in science classes.”

The folks arguing for the removal say that that is implicit in other rules in force. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.

Wesley R. Elsberry

Falconer. Interdisciplinary researcher: biology and computer science. Photographer. Husband. Christian. Activist.

3 thoughts on “Louisiana: Clearing the Way for Antievolution

  • 2009/01/15 at 9:15 am
    Permalink

    Isn’t the public admission that this statement is already implied within the existing text pretty much just as good as having the statement there?

  • 2009/01/15 at 10:59 am
    Permalink

    For the court venue, sure. But the game being played is one where individual teachers get encouraged to teach antievolution materials. It often happens that no one cares to take the flak that follows from standing up against religious sectarianism, and students get a lot of hogwash from their teachers. The teachers may mistakenly see the policy change as an indication that the stuff that was formerly disallowed is now just peachy. Which is likely exactly the result the people pushing for the removal are hoping for.

  • 2009/01/15 at 9:10 pm
    Permalink

    I see your point Wes. And at the same time it insulates the legislators from potential legal fallout because they can always insist that they never intended these kinds of arguments be allowed. Everything done with a wink and a nudge. And the kids and their families end up as always paying the price. I supposed that’s a sacrifice the DI just has to be willing to make.

Comments are closed.