Tom Davies, writing for the AP, has an article entitled Indiana Senate backs teaching creationism proposal. It’s reporting on Senate Bill 89 which used to talk about “creation science.” However, it’s been amended and now says nothing about science. Here is what Davies reports:
Indiana’s public schools would be allowed to teach creationism in science classes as long as they include origin of life theories from multiple religions under a proposal approved today by the state Senate.
However, here is what the bill says:
The governing body of a school corporation may
offer instruction on various theories of the origin of life. The curriculum for the course must include theories from multiple religions, which may include, but is not limited to, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Scientology.
It says not a thing about science. Maybe Mr. Davies got it wrong because some folks in the legislature don’t understand what the Second Reading Amendment did to the bill and are still talking about it as if it had something to do with science. But, as it is, it permits a comparative religion class on their beliefs about the origins of life. The prior bill referred to “creation science.” That term was removed and now we’re talking about a straight up course about religious beliefs.
When the AP is twenty-four hours behind on a story we call that a mistake. When the Indiana General Assembly is 150 years behind modern thought we call it “catching up”.
Scientology? Really? I trust someone’s will go around explaining the joke before the vote.
Yeah, I thought that was a nice touch.
I take your general point, Doug, but not your criticism of the AP story, or at least not as you’ve quoted it. Neither the headline nor excerpted paragraph say “science” except in “science classes.”
That’s far from saying that creation science will be taught, or that creationism is science.
What about the text of the law gives the AP the impression that the law provides any new authority for teaching religion in science classes?
First, the AP is terrible. I used to participate in a social news site and AP would routinely rewrite headlines and articles hours after releasing them. There were more arguments than I can remember that made no sense later because AP had Orwell’ed the article while people were arguing about.
Second, I hope they teach Buddhism! If this passes, I will make it my life’s mission to bring Buddhism into the classroom. In case you were wondering their feelings about creation, Wikipedia sums it up nicely:
“As no major principles of Buddhism contradict it, many Buddhists tacitly accept the theory of evolution.[1] Questions about the eternity or infinity of the universe at large are counted among the 14 unanswerable questions which the Buddha maintained were counterproductive areas of speculation.[2] As such, many Buddhists do not think about these kinds of questions as meaningful for the Buddhist goal of relieving oneself and others from suffering.”
My Buddhism creation class would be AWESOME. The first day would be me shrugging my shoulders and saying “Who knows? Who cares?” then “Let’s have cake.” Then every other class would be at a soup kitchen for the semester.
Dave for Teacher of the Year!
I find it weird that Native American beliefs weren’t included in that list, being the land of the Indians and all.
It was also a shame that the Flying Spaghetti Monster was overlooked for the laundry list of creation stories.
Doug,
On the Indiana GA Roll Call the bill is still called “Teaching Creation Science.”
http://www.in.gov/apps/lsa/session/billwatch/billinfo?year=2012&session=1&request=getBill&docno=89 Roll Call 108
What about alternatives to atomic theory or gravitation or the idea that plant life on earth depends on the sun? What about the alternatives to the idea that human DNA is our genetic material? Or that light is electromagnetic waves? Why are our students being denied these things?
Okay so the law says”allow” the teaching of creationism. My principal firmly believes that the earth is only six thousand years old. What is going to keep him from” forcing” me to teaching creationism? Remember, principals were given more authority last year. If I refuse will i be insubordinate and subject to being fired?