Summer is here, schools are out and the Texas State Board of Education is about to undertake the overhaul of the school science curriculum for the first time in a decade. As usual, the focus will once again be on teaching the theory of evolution in science classes. Conservative lawmakers and social activists have tried repeatedly to banish evolution from Texas classrooms and replace it with Biblical creationism. To that end, they have adopted both aggressive and passive means – firing administrators who are seen as "evolution friendly," scaring Christians by spreading the calumny that evolution is a Jewish conspiracy and most importantly, appointing dedicated creationists to lead the Board of Education. This year however, rather than attempt an outright ban on the teaching of evolution, a battle they have lost repeatedly, the creationists have come up with a strategy to plant doubts in the minds of students in the name of "accuracy."
DALLAS — Opponents of teaching evolution, in a natural selection of sorts, have gradually shed those strategies that have not survived the courts. Over the last decade, creationism has given rise to “creation science,” which became “intelligent design,” which in 2005 was banned from the public school curriculum in Pennsylvania by a federal judge.
Now a battle looms in Texas over science textbooks that teach evolution, and the wrestle for control seizes on three words. None of them are “creationism” or “intelligent design” or even “creator.”
The words are “strengths and weaknesses.”
Starting this summer, the state education board will determine the curriculum for the next decade and decide whether the “strengths and weaknesses” of evolution should be taught. The benign-sounding phrase, some argue, is a reasonable effort at balance. But critics say it is a new strategy taking shape across the nation to undermine the teaching of evolution, a way for students to hear religious objections under the heading of scientific discourse.
Already, legislators in a half-dozen states — Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri and South Carolina — have tried to require that classrooms be open to “views about the scientific strengths and weaknesses of Darwinian theory,” according to a petition from the Discovery Institute, the Seattle-based strategic center of the intelligent design movement.
“Very often over the last 10 years, we’ve seen antievolution policies in sheep’s clothing,” said Glenn Branch of the National Center for Science Education, a group based in Oakland, Calif., that is against teaching creationism.
The “strengths and weaknesses” language was slipped into the curriculum standards in Texas to appease creationists when the State Board of Education first mandated the teaching of evolution in the late 1980s. It has had little effect because evolution skeptics have not had enough power on the education board to win the argument that textbooks do not adequately cover the weaknesses of evolution.
Yet even as courts steadily prohibited the outright teaching of creationism and intelligent design, creationists on the Texas board grew to a near majority. Seven of 15 members subscribe to the notion of intelligent design, and they have the blessings of Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican.
What happens in Texas does not stay in Texas: the state is one of the country’s biggest buyers of textbooks, and publishers are loath to produce different versions of the same material. The ideas that work their way into education here will surface in classrooms throughout the country.
“ ‘Strengths and weaknesses’ are regular words that have now been drafted into the rhetorical arsenal of creationists,” said Kathy Miller, director of the Texas Freedom Network, a group that promotes religious freedom.
The chairman of the state education board, Dr. Don McLeroy, a dentist in Central Texas, denies that the phrase “is subterfuge for bringing in creationism.”
“Why in the world would anybody not want to include weaknesses?” Dr. McLeroy said.
See more articles on this latest attempt at subterfuge here, here and here. The last link is to a site published by Texans for Better Science Education, a pro-creationist group, the likes of which Brian Leiter aptly refers to as the Texas Talibans.
3 responses to “The Long Hot Summer of Creationist Discontent”
Creationists should use the persistence of their argument as proof against evolution. “If only the fittest survive, why is our logic around?”
Texas. It’s always in Texas. What happened to those people? Ruchira, you’re witnessing Texas-mentality first hand, what’s going on there?
LikeLike
Sadly, they try to make inroads into the minds of the most vulnerable-one of my son’s classmates is defending Intelligent Design vs. Evolution as an exercise in communication arts this week. He comes from a hyper-religious family which believes in the literal interpretation of the Bible.
None are so blind as those that refuse to see, even when their eyes are wide open.
LikeLike
Creationists should use the persistence of their argument as proof against evolution. “If only the fittest survive, why is our logic around?”
Or the science teachers could use the same dogged persistence to support evolution, given how the creationist modus operandi has morphed to suit their obscurantist purpose over the years. From aggressive demands of teaching creationism in science classes, they have now adapted to using the back-door approach of debating the “weaknesses” of the theory of evolution.
What is happenning in Texas? I wish I knew. Too many idiots being elected to high offices for one thing. “Everything is big in Texas,” they say. That certainly doesn’t apply to the IQ of our legislators, especially not to that of the horrendous governor, Rick “Good Hair” Perry.”
LikeLike