Darwin Would Not Have Supported
Censorship!
By
Terri Leo - State Board of Education
In the article (Houston
Chronicle, "State Board of
Education Must Be Held Accountable,"
February 12, 2009), the Texas Legislators,
who were quoted, misstated the current
debate when they said, "The SBOE continues
to engage in narrow theological debate
about the validity of evolution." These
Legislators obviously have been getting
their information from far-left-wing
groups and from many in the liberal news
media.
The Legislators did not name any specific
SBOE members because no such statements
have been made by any of us. All SBOE
meetings are recorded, and I invite the
public to go to
www.tea.state.tx.us to verify the
accuracy of my statement. No SBOE members
are seeking to remove evolutionary theory
from the science curriculum
standards. Evolution is a major theory,
and any standards without the theory of
evolution included in them would be
substandard. There is also no Board member
who is seeking to implement religious
beliefs into public school science
curricula.
For the past twenty years, students in
Texas have been required "to analyze,
review, and critique scientific
explanations, including hypotheses and
theories, as to the strengths and
weaknesses using scientific evidence and
information." This standard has
been applied to all scientific theories.
Pro-Evolution Advocates, however, want
evolution to be singled out and taught
differently from the other theories. They
want evolution to be taught without
including the weaknesses of this theory.
The evolutionists want the time-tested
standard to be removed from our Texas
standards and, hence, from our textbooks
and teaching materials. The twenty-year
old standard does not state nor imply the
teaching of religion, just "scientific
explanations and scientific evidence." If
a teacher in our state had used this
twenty-year-old standard as a "backdoor
vehicle" through which to teach students
religion, the ACLU most certainly would
have sued by now.
The
Houston Chronicle article goes
on to say that if the SBOE does not remove
this standard that it will "impact the
economic progress of our state." The facts
tell otherwise. According to a recent
press release by the Governor's office,
Texas has shown increases in both economic
growth and jobs while the rest of the
nation has shown a decline. In the 2009
State of the State Address the Governor
stated that 70% of the jobs created in the
U.S. were in Texas. All this has occurred
in Texas during the time that this
twenty-year-old policy has been in place.
A new Zogby poll released on 2.3.09
states, "A large majority (80%) agree that
teachers and students should have the
academic freedom to discuss the strengths
and weaknesses of evolution as a
scientific theory, with more than half
(54%) saying they strongly agree. A sixth
(17%) disagree."
(http://www.freemarket.org/Img/2009%20Zogby%20Poll%20Findings%20Report.pdf)
The open and vigorous public debate on
controversial issues is one of the
hallmarks of America. As a people, we
cherish and defend academic freedom,
political freedom, freedom of association,
freedom of movement, and freedom of
thought.
The 17% (i.e., Zogby poll) want to censor
out all credible science that opposes
Darwinian evolution.
If our public-school science standards
censor out scientific weaknesses, we limit
our educators by directing them to avoid
scientific controversy. As U.S. Senator
Robert Byrd (a Democrat) has wisely
pointed out regarding science education,
"If students cannot learn to debate
different viewpoints and to explore a
range of scientific theories in the
classroom, what hope have we for civil
discourse beyond the schoolhouse doors?"
Because education is truly a vehicle to
broaden horizons and enhance thinking,
varying scientific viewpoints should be
welcome as part of the school
experience. In the words of law professor
David DeWolf, "By presenting this
scientific controversy realistically,
students will learn how to evaluate
competing interpretations in light of
evidence -- a skill they will need as
citizens, whether they choose careers in
science or in other fields."
Darwin himself would not have supported
censorship of the scientific weaknesses of
his own theory. Indeed he wrote a whole
chapter in his book,
On the
Origin of Species, about the
difficulties with his theory. Darwin
said,
"If it could be demonstrated that any
complex organ existed, which could not
possibly have been formed by numerous,
successive, slight modifications, my
theory would absolutely break down."
The 17% who would thwart critical
thinking, particularly in light of recent
advances in science, can only be described
as censors, no matter what their
organizational name may say.
As Charles Darwin so aptly stated in
On the
Origin of Species,
"A fair result can be obtained only by
fully stating and balancing the facts
and arguments on both sides of each
question."
Terri Leo
State Board of Education District #6
www.terrileo.com
+++
teachboth@strengthsandweaknesses.org