Threaty Proposal Surfaces in Ohio--"God Forbid!"

Buzzle.com reports on proposed guidelines for teachers in Ohio schools to follow when discussing controversial topics. Threatiness abounds there. It's very, very dangerous to set up policies for teachers on how they can lead these discussions.

The proposal includes this statement:

"The goals of discussions of controversial issues are for students to have a better understanding of the issue and form a reasoned judgment that is based upon a critical analysis of the facts and arguments and is open to revision as conditions change."

Shelley Greene, Ph.D. is frightened enough to invoke the Deity (is that legal?):

"If the formula is supervised by a teacher with a particular point of view or, God forbid, an agenda, then the formula becomes a tool of indoctrination. Is this well-intentioned, good-for-the-kids yet another obfuscation from the Christian legislative soldiers?"

(Let's let "another obfuscation" go for a while. Intelligent Design is not a secret conspiracy. The agenda is wide open for anyone to see.)

Let's just consider whether it's a good idea for schools to keep their heads in the sand about Intelligent Design. If they think they can shield children from all exposure to this "nefarious scheme," they lost that one years ago.

There is one way in which ID opponents actually have been successful in keeping ID out of the public eye--they have consistently replaced it with a counterfeit. They've done the alien-from-outer-space thing, where they have inserted another personality into what looks like the same body.* Most of what you read about ID in the papers and newsmagazines, and most of what you see on the air, is something only remotely related to the real thing. That's one reason I can't suppress an ironic--but sad--laugh when I see ID accused of obfuscation. It's been all of about 17 hours since I posted the most recent of many examples of this.

Scientists are now starting to recommend distorting their message for the purpose of controlling thought about controversial topics. The Ohio proposal would seriously interfere with that. It reportedly

"provides sample rules for teachers to give to students before a classroom debate begins on a controversial topic. It also identifies the student skills required in the Ohio schools’ standards that need to be addressed during such discussions. The template will help teachers target these specific student reasoning skills, which can be applied to all controversial subjects when discussed within the classroom setting. The intent is to provide students with content that is rich and challenging, as well as allowing such classroom discussions without legal opposition."

Sounds just awful, doesn't it? Imagine the horror--picture the evil!--of students having content that is rich and challenging, led by a teacher who is prepared to guide a debate. In regard to "without legal opposition," be reminded that legal strictures on religious content in schools apply to staff and faculty, not to students. They already have the right to ask such questions.

The same buzzle.com article goes on to say,

"Since the release of the proposed guidelines, however, opposition already is growing. Patricia Princehouse, a teacher at the Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, believes such guidelines will allow religion-based challenges to the subject of evolution with teachers using the guidelines as a cover to teach creationism."

So what are they going to do if a student asks an ID-related question? Tell him he's an idiot, his parents are idiots, his pastor and Sunday School teachers are idiots, and he should just shut up? (That's the time-honored Pharyngula/Panda's Thumb approach.) Send him to the principal's office? Tell him that ID is creationism, and thus perpetuate a bald lie? Tell him that his religion can't be discussed in school (thus implying that it's false or evil, and thus violating the establishment clause)? Tell him that religion and science have nothing to do with each other--thus also denying many religions' beliefs and also violating the Constitution?

There is so much fear in anti-ID quarters! You'd think if they really thought they could defend their position, they'd be happy to do so, even in public schools!

*Somebody is going to accuse me of UFO delusions after writing that. Let me suggest in advance that you have a sense of humor. It's a metaphor.

Posted: Fri - May 4, 2007 at 01:47 PM |

Thinking Christian by Tom Gilson getCategoryName("<$CategoryUUID$>");

Threaty Proposal Surfaces in Ohio--"God Forbid!"

Thinking Christian by Tom Gilson