STICKER SHOCK
The GA case of ID/anti-evolution stickers has taken another turn;a judge has ordered all of the stickers removed:
The evolution disclaimers read: ”This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered.”
Of the many ID/creation issues, this is among the sillier. Of course that won’t stop Cobb county schools from appealing and spending more tax dollars. (Tip credit: Jeanne)
7 Responses to “STICKER SHOCK”
![]() Comment by Eric Holcombe May 25th, 2005 at 7:58 am |
They would have established the religion of critical thought? |
![]() Comment by speedwell May 25th, 2005 at 9:53 am |
Point your nose at the “Evolution is a theory, not a fact” idiocy, Eric. You know that I know that you know that critical thinking is the opposite of what the IDers want. If the sticker had said merely, “This textbook should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered,” I’d be on the front lines trying to get it put in every textbook in the country… and every Bible, too, come to think of it. |
![]() Comment by Ian Lewis May 25th, 2005 at 11:02 am |
My whole problem with “Evolution is just a theory” argument is that everything in science is just a theory. The only branch of science that has Theorems (i.e. proven theorys) is Mathematics, and Kurt Gödel had something to say about that. |
![]() Comment by Eric Holcombe May 26th, 2005 at 4:31 pm |
So what religion does the sticker establish? That is the court’s reasoning for removing it, no? I’m not so sure that was a constitutionally sound judgement. It should be just as easy to “outlaw” any social science book that deals with any mention of religious culture – warning labels notwithstanding. Surely an “explicit” discussion of religious culture would constitute establishment if this stupid sticker counts. “This textbook should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered,” I think if that had been happening in the classroom, no one would want a sticker. It’s not “open” when only one view is considered. |
![]() Comment by Anonymous May 27th, 2005 at 9:10 am |
“So what religion does the sticker establish?” Don’t be disingenuous, Eric. Everyone knows from the affiliations of the sticker’s supporters which religion was meant, and you standing there like a teenager with a dumbfounded look on your face, saying “duh, what?” just isn’t convincing us anymore. |
![]() Comment by Eric Holcombe May 27th, 2005 at 9:56 am |
“Well, that’s what they really meant” won’t stand up too well in the courtroom. If the justification for removing the sticker is that it establishes a state religion, they better be able to show that. |
![]() Comment by speedwell May 27th, 2005 at 2:10 pm |
Oh, spare me, Eric. If the sticker was designed to favor other religions besides your own, I’m surre we could hear your screeching over Niagara Falls. |