LA Senate passes academic freedom bill unanimously
NCSE has the story here. I didn't think that unanimous approval of such a bill by a state legislative body was possible, even in a fundy state like Louisiana. Two big monkey trials, Edwards v. Aguillard and Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish, originated in Louisiana.
Time is running out for the stalled Florida academic freedom bills. Academic freedom bills have also been introduced in Alabama and Michigan. It is practically inevitable that a state will enact an academic freedom law one of these days. The wording of many of these bills makes them virtually lawsuit-proof. Legislatures are finally realizing that a lot of the criticism of Darwinism is scientific and not religious in nature.
Time is running out for the stalled Florida academic freedom bills. Academic freedom bills have also been introduced in Alabama and Michigan. It is practically inevitable that a state will enact an academic freedom law one of these days. The wording of many of these bills makes them virtually lawsuit-proof. Legislatures are finally realizing that a lot of the criticism of Darwinism is scientific and not religious in nature.
Labels: Establishment clause (new #1), Evolution education (new #1)
posted by Larry Fafarman | 5/01/2008 11:05:00 AM
4 Comments:
One article states (link from the NCSE page to article in Hammond): According to the Senate's digest, Nevers' bill prohibits the state or any school official from hindering a public school teacher “from helping students understand, analyze, critique, and review, in an objective manner, the scientific strengths and weaknesses of existing scientific theories” such as evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming and human cloning. It also prohibits officials from censoring materials on the topics.
The bill itself may be lawsuit-proof, but if any instructor in any classroom promotes creationism or intelligent design in any way, that instructor and that school can be sued. All the legislation does is open the door for instructors to teach creationism without hindrance of school officials and pass the buck as to responsibility for the lawsuit.
Manuel
This comment has been removed by the author.
>>>>> The bill itself may be lawsuit-proof, but if any instructor in any classroom promotes creationism or intelligent design in any way, that instructor and that school can be sued. <<<<<<
Only a single judge -- and a crackpot judge at that -- ever ruled that teaching or even just mentioning ID in public schools is unconstitutional.
>>>Only a single judge -- and a crackpot judge at that -- ever ruled that teaching or even just mentioning ID in public schools is unconstitutional
1. It has not been proven that Jones is a crackpot judge.
2. Only one case has been brought forth. That's one for one in striking it down -- and the precedent of a federal court ruling (albeit not binding in Louisiana) will make the case unlikely to make it to trial (especially with Barbara Forrest in the state). It will be interesting to see if the case gets appeals and moves on, but that's the only real hope the IDiots have at this point.
Oh, and it still doesn't remove liability from the school district if legal proceedings ensue.
Manuel
Post a Comment
<< Home