Texas Schools will Teach Religion in Science Classes

Well the Texas State School Board finally got to the final vote on whether they will allow Creationism to be taught in their school system…Sanity and truth lost out. The board voted 13-2 in favor of the new curriculum

The website “Institute for Creation Research” A religious organization that promotes inserting religion into state and federal funded schools science classes, and was part of the evil cabal behind the decision, has the story here.

“After months of hearing debates over Texas science education standards, the 15-member State Board of Education voted to remove the requirement for teachers to teach the “strengths and weaknesses” of scientific theories, such as evolution, and instead adopted a requisite for students to critically analyze and evaluate “all sides of scientific evidence.””

Eugenie Scott, Executive Director of the pro-evolution lobbyist group National Center for Science Education said: “This is a setback for science education in Texas, not a draw, not a victory.”

“Having students ‘analyze and evaluate all sides of scientific evidence’ is code that gives creationists a green light to attack biology textbooks,” said NCSE project director Josh Rosenau.  My emphasis

I guess the next thing we will see is new textbooks designed just for the state standards that feature pictures of Jesus saddled up on a T-Rex, rounding up the goats and sheep.  There will of course be “scientific” expositions and study guides on how all the earth’s history and geological data is condensed into 6,000 years, and how “The Flood” mixed up all the evidence, and explanations on how all the other US States science books are teaching Heresy…which will soon become a crime in Texas.

One underhanded example of things to be pushed in their future fights is that in a democracy, legislators vote on policy to reflect the will of the people who elected them. And according to polls on religion a significant number of Americans did not think evolution was the best explanation for the origins of human life. So it seems that teaching truth is sidetracked in order to teach what the churches want.

They’ll soon have no more controversy on matters of religion…the schools will teach about the Christian God and the Christian Bible, and independent thought will not be allowed. Religious people in Texas are scary, I’ve meet a few, you don’t want to mess with Texas religion their veneer of being a civilized people and tolerant is pretty thin.

It’s going to be fun debating the next generation of graduates from their schools. Also going to be a hell of a job re-educating them so they can go on to colleges and universities outside the state. I think if I were a responsible teacher in the K-12 Texas state school system I would be giving notice and looking for honest employment elsewhere.

funny pictures of cats with captions
see more Lolcats and funny pictures

Truth Saves

Advertisements

About the word of me
Interested in family and friends,grandchildren, photography, darkrooms, history, archaeology, scuba diving, computers, software, fast cars, journalism, writing, travel, ecology, news, science, and probably most other subjects you could think of. Did I mention family and friends?? I require iced tea or cold brewed coffee and a internet connection to be fully functional. Sometimes there are just so many words in my head they spill out.

10 Responses to Texas Schools will Teach Religion in Science Classes

  1. correctmyreligion says:

    Is there no room for others opinions in science books? There are theories that embrace evolution with an original creator. When I went to college and they taught evolution my teacher was flexible on where the original gases or solids came from. There is no significant evidence for or against theistic evolution, just as there is no significant evidence for or against a non-theistic evolution.
    You are worried that ” independent thought will not be allowed”, but being that creation is a minority view these days, soesn’t it take some independent thought to break free from the absolutist view that there is no God?

  2. Pingback: Topics about Religion » Texas Schools will Teach Religion in Science Classes « The Word of Me…

  3. thewordofme says:

    Hi correctmyreligion, thanks for your reply.

    I always thought science classes were supposed to be about science…silly me. You do know that creationists teach that the earth and the whole universe is 6,000 years old, dinosaurs walked with men, Neanderthals were spawn of one of Noah’s sons.(this puts their time at 2500 BC+- instead of 250,000 to 30,000 BC), there was an ice age after the flood, there was a earth-wide flood, God confused our language at The Tower of Babel, Adam and Eve were real, Moses wrote the Pentateuch, and various other things that are known to be false?

    There is tremendous evidence for evolution, contrary to what your church or preacher is telling you, and far from being a theory in trouble it is growing stronger every day. I like to call it the Fact of Evolution.

    As far as independent thought goes, I am positing a future of once Christian creationists get their hands on secular science classes. They have been working for this for years and years…remember the Pennsylvania and Ohio school boards and the failed attempts there.

    Texas is joining about six or seven other Southern states that are turning their schools into religious institutes, and they are really going to mess up new generations of children.

    I guess I’m kind of old fashioned…I prefer that truths be taught in my schools, not some religious sects fantasy of how the world is.

  4. correctmyreligion says:

    Well there is a growing number of people that believe in an old earth creation and embrace science. I myself believe in the gap theory (of creationism) and that the stories of the old testament that you refer too were lore of the time. The gap theory (much like evolution) gives homage to the order in which the earth was formed over a reasonable time line (not 6000 years) . I have done some extensive research on evolution and I believe it. My post is not to refute evolution, I think that it is un-refutable. The object of my post is to say that you can embrace both. So many times the arguement of how the earth was created (or came into existance) has to do with “if god exists”. I think that you can embrace both. I do not belong to a church that has ever taught creation, nor have I ever been influenced in my decision of how the earth was created by a pastor (As typically pastors have no scientific training.

    Your preconceived notions about Creation is typical of someone who does not know all of the options out there. The Bible is a very old book. One that we can’t fully understand. I do not take a litteral view of the bible. I do not believe every verse that is in it, nor do I use it as my science book.

    The likelihood that you or anyone else knows what absolute truth is, is to claim diety and to claim to be all-knowing. It is unrealistic to say that Science is absolute. Science is relative to the evidence that we have obtained. People were put to death for claiming that the earth was not flat or that africans were human. Science is not absolute, it’s organic. It adapts to our evidence.

    I think non-theistic evolution is a theory, just as I believe theistic evolution is a theory.

  5. thewordofme says:

    Hi correctmyreligion thanks for your reply.

    You write:
    “Well there is a growing number of people that believe in an old earth creation and embrace science.”

    Would they be “Deists?” Ones who believe a god started it all then floated away. Then the whole silly drama of original sin and a Jesus needed to wipe away the sin would be useless.

    Would these “Creation Scientists” be thinking the earth is 4.5+- billion years old and the universe is 14.7 +- billion years old? Or by “reasonable time” do you mean something longer than 6,000 years but way shy of 4.5 billion years?

    You write:
    “I myself believe in the gap theory (of creationism) and that the stories of the old testament that you refer too were lore of the time.”

    I also believe the old stories are just myths. They are unsupported by science and therefore
    are not true. So once again I am faced with the dilemma that the story of original sin and need
    for Jesus is made up…by Paul.

    You write:
    “My post is not to refute evolution, I think that it is un-refutable. The object of my post is to say that you can embrace both.”

    I respect that you believe in both…somehow…I just wonder how that’s possible. Science tells us that humans (Homo-sapiens) have been on earth for around 200,000+- years, so that seems, to me at least, to suggest that the Adam and Eve story is pure myth. Science also tells us that the Noah’s flood story is myth, and we also know that men/women were spread all over the world and speaking their own languages at the supposed time of the Tower of Babel. There is very real doubt that the story of Exodus and the exploits of Joshua are anything more than myth. That Moses did not write the Pentateuch is accepted as fact by most scholars of the Old Testament.

    So here we are with many of the foundational stories of the Christian religion being suspect, or proven to be false. I feel very comfortable thinking and telling others that they are probably worshipping a chimera.

    How can people believe in something that is arguably false in so many ways? Prayers are never answered, the churches have been filled with predators of all kinds for thousands of years, Catholics and Protestants (among others) have killed each other by the millions over minor points of theology, and every time church and science have disagreed, science has won.

    One of the biggest hurdles for me has been that NO two sects can agree on a proper means of worshiping their deity or interpreting the Bible…after 2,000 years and millions upon millions of minds applied to the problem, Christianity remains as splintered and fragmented as it was in the beginning.

    Where is the authenticity here? How is it that the Holy Book is so filled with contradictions and lies (myths) and why is it that a book written by a bunch of sheep/goat herders has fooled so many people into thinking there was/is something floating around in the sky immersing him/herself in the personal lives of sheep/goat herders and handing down dietary laws and detailing how to handle menstruating women, which by the way makes no medical sense.

    The stories are unbelievable, make no sense, are obviously man-made…obviously not inspired of some superhuman super intelligence. Speaking of super…something…there has never been shown to be any proven supernatural phenomena, of any kind at all,—ever.

    You write:
    Your preconceived notions about Creation are typical of someone who does not know all of the options out there. The Bible is a very old book. One that we can’t fully understand.

    What options are out there? Do we believe that religion is viable? Do we believe that science is right most of the time, but in matters pertaining to the Christian religion it is all wrong? Do we pick and choose…6 from column A, 2 from column B?

    Regarding understanding the Bible, I don’t think anyone alive today can truly understand it. After all it was written by sheep herders aiming for an almost prehistoric peoples understanding, bringing a sense of family and group identity to a roaming people.

    You write:
    “Science is not absolute, it’s organic. It adapts to our evidence.”

    I think science adapts to The evidence. The evidence keeps adding up and its adding up in the scientific column. Darwin and his works keep getting stronger. The stuff that science predicts or experiments on is being proven right. We know the dates are right, and they don’t line up with the religious myths. We know the DNA evidence is right and it doesn’t line up with the Biblical myths.

    A scientific theory means that it is the framework on which all the evidence hangs…and makes sense…and it does in Darwin’s case, and from the sciences that have evolved because of it.

    For there to be a theory of theistic evolution there has to be credible-testable-peer reviewable evidence for it…where is it?

  6. correctmyreligion says:

    Do yo believe in one of the laws of thermodynamics that matter cannot be created or destroyed?

  7. thewordofme says:

    Hi correctmyreligion thanks for writing.

    Do you mean the first one of the laws?

    First law of thermodynamics
    • Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. It can only change forms.
    • In any process, the total energy of the universe remains the same.
    • For a thermodynamic cycle the net heat supplied to the system equals the net work done by the system.

    As we currently understand physics…yes
    However I’m not yet sure how quantum physics will impact these laws.

  8. sole4sail says:

    You have a great blog. I agree with your point of view. I was just perusing a few of your posts. Didn’t CMR’s misstatement sorta disprove his own theory? By replacing energy with matter?
    What I mean is, many religious folk compare the physical world with matter, and the spiritual world with energy.

  9. thewordofme says:

    Hi sole4sail,
    Thanks for writing.

    Thanks for the kudos.

    I wasn’t aware that religious folks did this. So do they think the Holy Spirit is a ball of energy or something like that?

  10. Pingback: A reformation of the Mind « ~En students anteckningar~

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: