spendius wrote:wande- could you provide accurate details of the composition of the Rio Rancho school board under consideration in your paste job at the time of the two votes mentioned and the reasons for any changes. (Imagine that in triplicate.)
The policy was first passed in 2005, when three people on the five-member board were supporters of ID: pastors Marty Scharfglass and Don Schlichte, and Kathy Jackson, whose husband Kevin Jackson had previously had a formal family organization send copies of Michael Behe's "Darwin's Black Box" to state science teachers. Jackson was later elected Mayor of Rio Rancho, but was forced to resign after a series of financial scandals. In the last school board election, Kathy Jackson was replaced by science supporter Divyesh Patel, and pastors Schlichte and Scharfglass suddenly found themselves in the minority regarding Policy 401. Patel was joined by the two members who opposed the policy from its inception, board president Lisa Cour and member Margaret Terry, and the topic of this divisive policy was re-visited, culminating in a vote on December 3rd, 2007.
Of the fourteen people who made public comments before the vote, eleven supported the board's decision to revoke the policy, while three wanted the policy to be retained. Jesse Johnson talked about the divisive nature of the Dover, PA situation, warning everyone that "One teacher promoting creationism, plus one angry parent, equals a divided community and an expensive lawsuit." Another speaker mentioned that science changes and progresses, while religion remains static, and urged the board to consider the advice of Father George Coyne (former Vatican astronomer) to keep science and religion separate. Teacher Theresa Walker supported revocation of the policy because it redundantly re-states state science standards, and therefore implies that Rio Rancho's science teachers are incapable of following these standards.
The head of the district's Scimatics Academy, science teacher Dan Barbour, had some of the most penetrating commentary:
The policy has done exactly what the Wedge Strategy is designed to do: divide our community, discredit the scientific process, and promote religious explanation as a scientific explanation.
Former State Board of Education member and post author Marshall Berman, a physicist, mentioned that ID claims such as the lack of evidence of evolution in the fossil record are patently false, and that supporting such claims resulted in the Dover PA board members losing their elections, while the district ended up paying a million-dollar fine. Science teacher Jennifer Myashiro talked about how distracting and divisive the policy had been in her own classes, and how the district was running the risk of alienating both good science teachers and high-tech businesses. Another science teacher complained that giving students spoon-fed questions straight out of ID texts was hardly "critical thinking," and asked why, out of 800 state performance standards and benchmarks, was this single standard subjected to such meddling. Physicist and post author Kim Johnson talked about the Lemon Test, and mentioned that Policy 401 certainly engaged both the Effect and Entanglement clauses regarding unconstitutional mixing of religion with public policy, and quite likely the Intent clause as well.
Among those arguing that the board should retain the policy were a parent who said that since neither evolution nor creation could explain new species, both should be taught, and a speaker who cited Einstein's comment that "Science without religion is lame." The executive director of IDnet-NM, Joe Renick, read a lengthy statement defending the policy's "honorable intentions and clear language." Renick said the policy simply promoted neutrality through objective science education, and blamed the speakers against the policy for being the ones who got things so entangled with religion. He also called them the Darwinist SWAT team!
Post author Dave Thomas was the last commenter, and he read Renick's statements on the Christian radio station to the board, explaining that statements such as these were the real reason the policy was perceived as supportive of religion, ID, and creationism.
The board members then discussed their own views on the policy. Members Cour, Patel and Terry gave brief and eloquent reasons for their opposition to the policy. Scharfglass said he still supported his policy because biology indeed challenges the religious beliefs of some students, that evolution should not be a topic of indoctrination, and that NM's standards do not say "Other data should be excluded." Schlichte went on for many minutes, backed up by a Powerpoint presentation which he said was necessary because "Not everyone in our culture understands these issues." He went on for quite a while on the claim that all laws stem from beliefs, some religious in nature, and cited bad laws (Nazi extermination of Jews, Communist suppression, Prohibition) as well as good laws (women's suffrage) as all being based on belief. He said that bad legislation results in the sacrifice of Truth and Freedom, and said that the First Amendment of the Constitution has been reinterpreted from its original purpose (no state-sponsored Religion) to a new, invalid purpose (separation of God from public institutions). He declared that the Supreme Court was schizophrenic for thinking this way, and yet allowing "In God We Trust" to be printed on US currency, or "One Nation Under God" to be included in the Pledge of Allegiance. Schlichte then declared that evolution is just a theory, not a fact, and that students could not learn how to get to Mars if facts (like 2+2=4) were stripped out of science texts. However, he claimed, if all references to evolution were torn out of biology texts (and he complained that they all mention evolution), students would not be impaired one whit in getting to Mars. He then compared the "Two Models," one being "Matter=>Monkeys=>Man" and the other being in the Book of Genesis, and involving the Creator mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. He said it was better just to remove evolution from school rather than indoctrinate students into believing it as fact, and cited the preponderance of public support for creationism (over 50% in some polls) as evidence that there are valid theories besides evolution.
Board president Cour made a few additional comments, pointing out that the Rio Rancho School District already has policies regarding "Controversial Issues" (Policy 426) and "Freedom of Expression" (Policy 354), and said that students are quite free to pray on their own, and to discuss God and religion in humanities classes like sociology or philosophy, where the discussions are much more respectful and restrained than in science classes. Cour reiterated that students are encouraged to think critically about all topics, not just about evolution, and that she trusts science teachers to follow state curriculum guidelines without redundant coercion by the District. Board president Cour also stated that
Just because evolution is embraced by evil and unethical people, it does not mean evolution is evil.
More:http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/12/game-over-in-ri.html
