The Scopes Strategy: Creationists Try New Tactics to Promote Anti-Evolutionary Teaching in Public Sc

[cali]

Under the guise of "academic freedom" creationists are co-opting some old heroes of the fight to teach evolution in the classroom for their anti-science campaign
MEDIA COMMONS/WATSON DAVIS

Now, more than 80 years after the famous "Scopes Monkey Trial" in Tennessee, creationism proponents are pushing for state legislation there that could make it easier for teachers to bring unscientific ideas back into the science classroom in public schools. To bolster their cause, the backers of the new bills are invoking none other than teacher John Scopes, the trial's pro-evolution defendant, as an icon of independent thinking.

"…oday's evolutionary scientists have become the modern-day equivalents of those who tried to silence Rhea County schoolteacher John Scopes for teaching evolution in 1925, by limiting even an objective discussion of the scientific strengths and weaknesses of evolutionary theory," David Fowler, head of the Family Action Council of Tennessee and chief lobbyist behind Tennessee's proposed anti-evolution bill, wrote recently in an op–ed in the Chattanoogan.

Scopes had been charged with violating the Butler Act, which prohibited the teaching of evolution in public schools. Thus, creationists say, he certainly would have supported a law that encouraged the teaching of all sides of "controversial issues"—such as the bill some are working to pass in Tennessee as part of a post–intelligent design (ID) campaign to teach the "strengths and weaknesses" of evolution. If adopted, this language would send a positive message to teachers inclined to introduce creationism and ID into the classroom when discussing biology and the origins of life.

Trouble in Tennessee
Following the drubbing they received in the constitutional test case of Tammy Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District in Pennsylvania five years ago (which kept explicit teaching of intelligent design, or ID, out of public schools) creationists shelved the ID language—at least publicly—and shifted their approach. More recently, they have tried to codify versions of the "strengths and weaknesses" language in states across the country—an effort that has so far met with limited success. The closest that creationists came to getting such terminology on the books was in 2008 in Louisiana, where an initial "academic freedom" bill included the phrase, but was replaced with more watered-down language that nonetheless left the door open to teaching creationism, some science educators say.

<snip>

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=scopes-creationism-education

[SpiralHawk]

1. Beeeleeevers are bizee beeeleeeving

Whatever. Me no like when they shove their beeeleeefs down other's brainpans.

[MBS]

3. This is a FANTASTIC cartoon

Thanks.Going on my bulletin board right now!

[MBS]

2. sigh. . .

It's just never-ending , it seems. A hundred years ago, one could ascribe the problem to lingering ignorance. But NOW. . it's just plain perversion.