So let's see....
1st. Our economy is staggering under a deficit like never before, and spiraling housing and gas prices.
2nd. Our military is overextended in far reaching empire building.
So now... we have the Conservatives trying to sell us that Intelligent Design belongs in Science classes in our schools.
Shouldn't we be investing in our kids education to compete on a global scale? Can't wait to hear the Nobel prize offered for "Voodoo Science".
Leave Sunday School to Sunday.
9 comments:
The economy is statistically the strongest in the world. again. Just above where it was before it crashed at the end of Clinton (before Bush II,) the unemployment rates are historic lows. The markets are stably growing (2-3%) as opposed to irrational. Housing purchases and housing ownership are at historic highs.
Gas prices, well, a little over half of what the rest of the world is paying, and still in inflation adjusted dollars below 1973 highs.
The 1.6 million person standing army has almost 150,000 deployed with record re-enlistment rates. Yep we're over extended. We should bring 'em home and post them practicing at bases waiting for threats here that are over before they begin as opposed to drawing the venomous to them for chances at martydom and their 73 virgins. or is it 72 lightly used?
I think it time for us to waste some intellectual capital on intelligent design.
We've quadrupled in real (inflation-adjusted) dollars the 'investment' in education. While we insist on huge infrastructure (stadiums, performing arts centers, 6 employees per teacher in the NEA) our real education has suffered and we don't even track where schools are working and where they are not. . . Oh. wait. Now that No Child has us testing we are beginning to find out that schools, some with the most money, are performing poorly, while those that actually try to spend on teaching are doing fine. Wow. Data. Its. Wonderful.
No child left behind is a farce. It was a farce in Texas when GW started it. All they did was transfer kids out, without documented disposition.
But the real subject is Intelligent Design. There is no intellectual capital being spent there. NONE. Just the usual "I am going to cram by beliefs down your throat" mentality that you have come to expect from the Cons.
Can't blame the NEA on that one.
On Iraq....Now the Generals and Con Senators are beginning to say Iraq is a quagmire.
Uhhhh. What does this mean.. "While we insist on huge infrastructure (stadiums, performing arts centers, 6 employees per teacher in the NEA)". My high school had a stadium and a PAC. Had them for years. Usually bonded capital improvements, not operating budget.
Also, test scores are at all time highs. Is there really a problem?
Bonded to build, not to operate. All of a sudden the schools have no operating budget because of increased fixed costs. Doesn't take an MBA to realize that capital improvements build nice things but don't increase operating funds to run the damn things. Our schools have been on a building binge and then two-three years later complain they don't have funds to run them. Even though real dollars have increased 20-25% year-to-year.
The intelligent design argument is weird. Bush's statement is "teach the controversy." Sounds like inform kids of the argument to me. Also sounds like the Einsteinian discusion of "the more I learn about the mechanics of the universe, the more I see the hand of God."
The debate is an old one. Galileo argued the case. I don't have an answer, but I don't believe removing all traces of religion from public life reflects our values or our common heritage. Almost every serious scientist, and every serious theologian has discussed the implications of science and theology. Are we to keep our children blind to the discussion of centuries? of Dante? of Galileo? Chaucer? Aquinas? Descartes? Adam Smith? even Darwin discussed the issues. But, I guess we should not in schools as we might confuse the children.
P.S. Detroit's tax base enabled by from GM, Ford, and Chysler are not repeatable through most of the rest of the country. Local taxes for operating funds were non-existant because of the huge business taxes collectable in that specific local.
Then teach it in a humanities calss. No Scientist would ever say..
Here's our theory, but maybe some one waved their magic wand and "poof" we appeared.
I don't have a problem teaching "Intelligent Design" in a Religious Studies class. My issue is Legislating curriculum down to a specific Subject.
It reminds me of the Wisconsin State House passing a bill that says that Pi is equal to 3.2 to make calculations easier.
Science should be left to Scientific Facts and Theories, not what a particular religious group decides. What's next, deciding the Internet is nothing but Porn and banning it from schools?
I've got to admit, some more common ground with BarleyMan. Intelligent Design is indeed a not so veiled approach to creationism and should not be part of a public school curriculum. It is not grounded i fact, only beliefs and faith. And while Einfahrt is correct about "teach the controversy", it should on ly be that there are opposing views (albeit very limited)to the accepted norm of evolution.
BTW BarleyMan...Conservatives and Right Wing Christian Zealots are two different animals.
Pinkos, Democrats, and Liberals are different people too.
He Guys, I hope you do not mind but I have lost you. Everyone should read Bill Bryson's book A Short History of Nearly Everything.
Post a Comment