On 31/08/2008, at 12:50 AM, Gary Nunn wrote: > > >> "McCain's VP Wants Creationism Taught in School" >> >> http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/08/mccains-vp-want.html >> Told you Maru >> William T Goodall > > > I'm reading that blog entry a little different. She appears to be > advocating > to allow the debate and discussion of both.
That's the current tactic from the creationists trying to get round the various court rulings. "Teach the controversy" and "Teach both sides". > I didn't read anything that > shows her as completely supporting creationism instead of evolution. If you support "teaching both sides" then you're a creationist. It's a code word. > > > I don't think I would want it to be taught as an "equal" > alternative, but > she's right, a healthy (and controlled) debate about a socially > sensitive > subject could be a healthy and useful life skill to develop. Not in school, and not in science class. In comparative religion, maybe, but it's hard enough to teach good science without adding a load of creation myths to the course. And that's the issue - "Both sides"? No - because if they allow "both sides" they have to allow ALL sides. That means Muslim, Hindu, Sikh, Aboriginal... If you really wanted to cover what EVERY religion says about creation, there wouldn't be time for any science at all. Charlie. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
