Indiana creationist bill passes committee

[cleanhippie]

ndiana's Senate Bill 89, which if enacted would allow local school districts to "require the teaching of various theories concerning the origin of life, including creation science," was passed by the Senate Committee on Education and Career Development on January 25, 2012. The vote was 8-2, with the bill's sponsor and committee chair Dennis Kruse (R-District 14), Carlin Yoder (R-District 12), Jim Banks (R-District 17), Jim Buck (R-District 17), Luke Kenley (R-District 20), Jean Leising (R-District 42), Scott Schneider (R-District 30), and Frank Mrvan Jr. (D-District 1) voting for and Earline S. Rogers (D-District 3) and Tim Skinner (D-District 38) voting against the bill.

Testimony against the bill stressed the unconstitutionality of teaching creation science, established by the Supreme Court in 1987. Among those testifying against the bill were John Staver, professor of chemistry and science education at Purdue University; Chuck Little, executive director of the Indiana Urban Schools Association; David Sklar, the Director of Government Relations for the Jewish Community Relations Council; the Reverend Charles Allen, a chaplain for Grace Unlimited, a campus ministry in the Indianapolis area; Reba Boyd Wooden, executive director of the Indiana Center for Inquiry; and Chuck Little, executive director of the Indiana Urban Schools Association.

http://ncse.com/news/2012/01/indiana-creationist-bill-passes-committee-007164

[deacon_sephiroth]

1. unconstitutionality of teaching creation science

I would instead protest the very notion of calling the garbage that comes form creationist sources as even being called "science." What a pervertion.

(also I'd like to add "oh goody, I have a button for smilies now.... and no spell check, so I can continue to look like an illiterate schmuck, but at least I can be a playful one.&quot

[digonswine]

2. Teach the conspiracy!

They say there is nothing wrong w/ exposing students to all sides of the matter-as if there are more than one.

I will quote Dr. Spaceman from 30 Rock--"Science is. . whatever we want it to be."

[edhopper]

3. After Sputnik

we had a race to have our students the most scientific literate on the planet.
Now the States are racing to see who can be the most ignorant fuckers ion Earth.

[cbayer]

4. What a bunch of dumbasses.

[cleanhippie]

5. I couldn't agree more.

[cbayer]

14. Hey, look down. Skepticscott wants to know why you are broadbrushing.

[skepticscott]

15. And yet another attempt at deflection

It was YOUR statement, clear, unqualified and unsolicited. The question is directed at you. If you want to extend your answer to apply to others, that's between you and them.

[cleanhippie]

16. I think he is trying to make a very valid point.

No need to be so obtuse about it.

[cbayer]

17. You two are too funny (sometimes).

The Indiana legislators that voted to take this to the assembly are [insert your favorite pejorative here].

That's not a broadbrush statement. It's my opinion of them.

A point is being made, but it's not valid. It's rhetorical and petty.

While there are some that can be goaded into this game, I'm not going to play.

[cleanhippie]

18. And you are too hypocritical (sometimes)

Because in this thread, you claimed that making statement like the one YOU just made, was a broadbrush attack.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12187493#post4




Rhetorical and petty? Unless you are talking about YOUR posts, you couldn't be MORE wrong.


(BTW, I still agree with you on your original sentiments above, that these guys are a bunch of dumbasses)

[darkstar3]

19. "It's rhetorical and petty."

Welcome to the game of reciprocation.

[cleanhippie]

20. I think one can only play that game when it suits one's agenda.

And right now, it's not suiting the agenda.




Some would call that a double-standard, better known as hypocrisy.

[skepticscott]

21. My question in #13 still stands

and the very valid point being made is that you seem to be hypocritical about your upbraiding others for broad brushing. Every statement from others that you've labeled as broad brushing is no more then THEIR opinion of the people they're referring to, so why is that justification any less valid in those cases than it is here? Is it really your position that as long as something is an "opinion", that it's not broad brushing?

I can understand why you continue to duck such a simple question, and don't think that it isn't obvious to most of the other people here as well.

[skepticscott]

7. Sounds like

broad brushing to me.

[cbayer]

9. Well, then, no wonder you get so confused about the term.

Calling a specific group of people, in this case the committee members who passed this thing, a name based on their specific actions is not broad brushing, scott.

Calling the entire legislature, who has not even voted on it yet, a name could be.

Calling all of the Christians in Indiana that name certainly would be.

[skepticscott]

10. So labeling ALL members of a group

because of something only some of them have done is broad brushing and not OK, but labeling people (any group of people) simply and broadly as "dumbasses" because of ONE thing they did out of thousands is perfectly fine in your book?

Got it. Thanks for clarifying.

[cbayer]

11. Are you really defending creationsists?

[skepticscott]

12. Nice try at deflection

Answer my question first, then I'll answer yours.

[skepticscott]

13. Come on, you can do it

Answer the question:

Why is allegedly labeling a whole group of people because of something only some of them have done broad brushing and not OK, but labeling people (any group of people) simply and broadly as "dumbasses" because of ONE thing (or even some things) they have done out of thousands perfectly fine?

If you really want to lead by example, disavow hypocrisy. Be the change you advocate.

[2ndAmForComputers]

6. I'll say it. Creationists are idiots. All of them. No exceptions.

And no, I won't apologize.

[MarkCharles]

8. 7 Republicans, and 1 Democrat voting FOR...

and two Democrats voting against.

Republicans, all of them on the committee, voted FOR!


Indiana has a lot of fundie Christians, I hear. Embarrassingly, one of them is related to me, and he gives lots of $ to his Republican causes, including bringing religion back to the classrooms of his state.