Two cheers for the judge
Sometimes you just don't know whose side to be on. A federal judge has ordered Cobb County schools to remove stickers from their textbooks, claiming they conveyed a religious endorsement. The stickers bore a disclaimer that evolution is a "theory," not a "fact."
I'm glad the stickers are gone. Not because they're religious, but because they're stoopid. "Theory" and "fact" are not contradictory. We may never get these people to understand evolution, but we should at least strive to teach them the definition of the word "theory." Too many of them believe it's synonymous with "hypothesis" or "wild-ass guess."
The theory of evolution is as well established as the theory of relativity or quantum theory (at least to the extent that that claim can be made of a "soft" science. Pardon the implied elitism), yet these are not taught with disclaimers. Granted, in all cases, there are some unresolved questions at the margins, but such is the nature of science. The basic tenets of all three are no longer in question.
Had the school board made this decision, or even an education official, I would be celebrating unreservedly. Maybe it's just me, but the action of this judge gives me pause. He saw his decision as backed by the establishment of religion clause, but I frankly think that's a bit of a stretch. Do we really want judges to be the ultimate arbiters of our children's curricula, even if we happen to agree with the outcome this time?
And liberals, before you answer, think about this: After eight years of Bush appointments to the bench, it would not be hard to imagine a scenario in which the roles were reversed. In fact, it wouldn't be hard to imagine it now.
But, for the time being, two cheers for the judge... I guess.
(By the way, buy some Ribbon Magnets. Do it for the children.)
Comments
I pretty much concur with you, Barry
One point: you will note that the judge's background is not spelled out (e.g. was he a Clinton appointee?).
In every decision by a judge who decides along conservative lines, the media will automatically point out that he/she was a Reagan or Bush appointee.
Bernie Goldberg made this point well in his book "Bias" when he quoted Peter Jennings as identifying 'conservative' senators while merely referring to the Democrats as just that.
It's subtle but telling.
Posted by: mal | January 14, 2005 10:27 AM
I'm going to have to disagree with my 2 friends on this one.
Here is the actual text of the labels:
"This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."
Where is the religious element?
Posted by: CRB | January 14, 2005 11:48 AM
CRB, I agree with you that the stickers did not constitute an endorsement of religion. That's exactly why I don't like the idea of the judge intervening. To me, it's kind of ends-and-means question.
Posted by: Barry N. Johnson | January 14, 2005 12:47 PM
My bad, I should have read your entry completely and CAREFULLY before commenting. We're all in agreement.
Posted by: CRB | January 14, 2005 04:38 PM
The judge was no doubt thinking the "religious element" is implied because usually only the creationists argue for such disclaimers, and creationists are by definition religious.
Posted by: Tracy Miller | January 15, 2005 03:06 AM
It was with pointed selectiveness that the Cobb County school district decided to alert students to the fact that evolution is not yet a proven fact, but is instead, a theory. Gasp! I'm shocked! You mean our venerable scientists and learned researchers haven’t yet proved every theory that exists? Well, I think Cobb County decision makers left a few theories out of their warning and are therefore derelict in their duty in alerting the erstwhile student population of Cobb County. In fact, I don’t think stickers will suffice; perhaps a pamphlet would be a better tool of disseminating this critical information.
No apologies for the sarcasm, folks. Specifically selecting the theory of evolution as opposed to any other scientific theory as something for which students need to be advised of belies the fact that is an issue of “theory versus fact”. If we removed all issues that are still theoretical from science texts, we would have pretty slim texts. The action of the Cobb County school district was a thinly veiled attempt to level the playing ground between creationism and the theory of evolution as presented in a scientific curriculum. I am not going to debate the issue of faith versus science but this is not a debate that should be played out in school texts.
Personally, I see no conflict between the theories of science and the belief in the divine. I want the Cobb County district and all other public school districts to leave the teaching of science to the teachers and leave matters of faith to the student himself.
Millie
Posted by: Mlv | January 15, 2005 09:24 AM
I hate to break it to you, but this month's Discover magazine proves evolution, no kidding. Pick up a copy and read it
Posted by: That Guy | January 15, 2005 11:57 AM
TG, I'll check it out. But it's preaching to the choir. Evolution was proven to me long ago.
Posted by: Barry N. Johnson | January 15, 2005 12:25 PM
proving evolution....its a bit of human hubris to presume we finally have all the answers
I've no doubt in the evolutionary process, but I suspect there are still components of it for which we don't have the full picture yet. Its an ongoing puzzle for which we probably won't put together all the pieces for a long, long time. The more we learn, the more avenues we have to research. Its like an exponentially increasing equation.
Posted by: Mlv | January 15, 2005 09:48 PM