Lauri Lebo Rips the Cover Off of HB368/SB893

Lauri Lebo, writing for Scientific American, has written an expose on the origins of HB368/SB893. In it, she points out that these academic freedom bills have particular origins which underlie their true point:

Sponsor Rep. Bill Dunn (R–Knoxville) said [David] Fowler [head of the Family Action Council of Tennessee] submitted the legislation to him in early February. The latter's organization is associated with James Dobson's conservative Christian Focus on the Family and advocates for "biblical values" and "godly officials".

Dunn could not explain why a Christian organization would be pushing legislation that supposedly has nothing to do with inserting religion into science class. He referred the question to Fowler.

Fowler, who would not say whether he is a young earth creationist ("I think that's irrelevant," he noted), said he is trying to correct the "dogmatic" presentation of science in the classroom. "This is about open discourse," he said, adding, "Good education requires critical thinking."

Fowler has spoken with members of the Discovery Institute—he would not say specifically whom—and said he drafted the Tennessee bill based on sample legislation the Institute created.

Dunn explains: "We've reversed the roles of the Scopes Trial. All we're saying is let's put all the scientific facts on the table."

Why, indeed, is a bill such as this being pushed so heavily by a Christian organization if it has no religious elements to it? What is “in it” for them? Here is where the bulls**t detector goes off. Just once, I would like one of these organizations to be honest about why they want this legislation passed. Is it too much to ask that of fellow Christians? This kind of thing leaves a very bad taste in the mouth of your average scientist, who already regards organized Christianity as hostile to them (and why wouldn't they?). It has the same effect on your average EC, and just reinforces the notion that modern evangelicalism is sadly off-base and headed in the wrong direction.

----------------
Now playing: Harry Nilsson - The Puppy Song
via FoxyTunes

Meanwhile, In Tennessee...

Lauri Lebo has a piece in Scientific American on the “academic freedom” bills that have popped up and sheds a spotlight on one that has just come to light in my back yard—Tennessee. She writes:

The home state of the Scopes Trial is now on the verge of adopting the "strengths and weakness" language with the February 8 introduction of House Bill 368 (pdf). A week later, its identical counterpart, SB 893, was introduced in the senate. Whereas similar bills in Oklahoma and New Mexico have already perished in committee this year, observers are watching Tennessee's developments warily.

"The fact that it's moving so quickly is a matter of concern," says Josh Rosenau, a spokesperson for the National Center for Science Education, a watchdog organization that monitors attacks on classroom teaching of evolution. "There appears to be some momentum behind it, which suggests it could pass."

So where does this bill come from?:

"…[T]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.

One can almost see the hand labeled “Discovery Institute” up the back of his shirt making his mouth move. All of the supporters of these bills say the same thing: that they want to inject critical thinking into science. The problem is that they do not give a rip about the rest of the scientific enterprise. Chemistry? Physics? Geology? Not important. The entire focus is on evolution. They want it gone and they do not care how they go about it.

----------------
Now playing: Genesis - Stagnation (2007 Remaster)
via FoxyTunes

A Move to Repeal the Louisiana “Academic Freedom” Bill

Panda's Thumb points us to an article by Lauri Lebo on the movement afoot to repeal the “stealth creationism” bill that was passed in Louisiana in 2008, allowing public school teachers latitude about what to bring into class as supplemental material when teaching about evolution and to emphasize the “weaknesses” of the theory. She writes of David Kopplin, a high school student who is challenging the bill. She writes:

I’ve long had a soft spot for young people standing up to religious bullying. So I want to give a shout out to Zack Kopplin, a Baton Rouge Magnet High School Senior. Kopplin is leading a campaign to repeal the stealth creationist law that is the 2008 Louisiana Science Eduction Act.

In December, Kopplin stood up to the Louisiana Family Forum, a Christian organization that had been trying to get creationist-language inserted into state public school textbooks. LFF members had argued that the proposed textbooks were biased in favor of evolution. (Reality is just so unfair!) Kopplin led a campaign to lobby the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education to side with sound science. Due in large part to his efforts, board members, by an 8-2 vote, agreed to proceed with the purchase of biology textbooks.

As Ms. Lebo writes, Louisiana is the only state that passed one of these bills that was proposed but a whole mess of them were proposed in different states across the nation. Given what happened in Livingston Parrish a few months back, I hope he succeeds.

----------------
Now playing: Anthony Phillips & Harry Williamson - Gypsy Suite - Movement IV: The Crystal Ball
via FoxyTunes

Lauri Lebo Comments on Livingston Parrish and Bruce Chapmen's Response

Lauri Lebo is particularly critical of Bruce Chapman's response to the goings on down in Louisiana, where Livingston Parrish School Board has elected to add creationism to the school curriculum in 2011-2012. Chapman was quick to distance the Discovery Center from the fracas, writing:

But in Livingston Parish, east of Baton Rouge, some enthusiasts for a literal Biblical account of creation decided that the new law gives them authority to teach creationism -- the account from Genesis. That view clearly violates the law and also the U.S. Constitution as it long has been interpreted.

In response to this she writes:

Once again, after pushing for anti-evolution language that opens the door to teaching creationism, the good fellows at the Discovery Institute bravely turned around and ran away from the local creationist-talking school board members who want to champion their cause.

Because the DI’s first rule about creationism? Don’t talk about creationism.

In lobbying for academic freedom bills, the DI carefully avoided discussion of Christianity, instead arguing that it was in the students' best interests to learn about all of the "wide range of views" regarding evolution. But that didn't work. She continues:

In lobbying for LSEA, the Discovery Institute had worked closely with the Louisiana Family Forum, a conservative Christian organization that directly championed the teaching of creationism as recently as 2004. (Read how Louisiana Coalition for Science’s Barbara Forrest connects the dots here.) However, because of that pesky First Amendment, which prohibits using public school biology class as a pulpit, creationism is never specifically mentioned in the LSEA. Instead, LSEA relies on code language to attack the teaching of evolution and other subjects that Christian fundamentalists hate because it contradicts their narrow religious worldview - reality be damned.

Forrest's referenced article is devastating in presenting its evidence that the Discovery Institute is clearly aware of what is going on in Louisiana and is supportive of it. As with Dover, all of the effort has gone into making this another test case of a law but the DI continually fails to understand that, contrary to what Chapman writes, these people in the rural parrishes and counties don't want ID taught, they want creationism taught. Because of the vague language of the LSEA and the fact that the language prohibiting the teaching of creationism was stripped from the law, local boards are taking action. Maybe this is not what the Discovery Institute had in mind, but they should have realized that this is what would happen. It is exactly the same thing that happened in Dover.

----------------
Now playing: David Lanz - Song for Monet
via FoxyTunes