|
Jun. 13, 2006
Conservatives Against Intelligent Design
(If you are using IE and cannot view this properly, click here. I'm working on it.)
 There is an interesting little movement going on in the blogosphere that has spawned some interesting conversation. Indian Cowboy has started a new blog: Conservatives Against Intelligent Design. With 229 signatories since its inception on May 27, it is gaining some attention. His mission statement?
Conservatives
Against Intelligent Design (CAID) was founded to give a voice to
Republicans, Independent Conservatives, and Libertarians across the
country who stand opposed to the teaching of intelligent design and
other forms of creationism in the classroom. In recent years Republican
legislators at all levels of government have authored, sponsored, and
voted for various anti-evolution bills with perceived immunity,
confident that those who vote for them are creationists like
themselves. CAID is intended as a wake-up call to these legislators, to
remind them that the teaching of evolution is not a partisan issue, but
rather one of the separation between theology and science. (Read the rest here) The
resulting discussion has been interesting to follow. I'm not going to
get into the science of either creationism or evolution in this entry,
because, well, I doubt I could hold my own in the discussion. That and
I've had enough of that particular debate and the colorful names I have
been called. Dangerous Liberty
touches on this issue a little. But I cannot help but wonder, what is
the point? ID isn't taught in science class and the ACLU has been
pretty effective at keeping it that way. In fact, states have had a
hard time slipping critical analysis into their standards...this isn't
teaching ID, just teaching students to question the theory of
evolution. Court rulings, for the most part, have favored evoltuion
over creation.
Here's my issue. Especially coming from a fellow
libertarian-leaning, conservative type person. Education is not an
issue for the central government to get involved in. The central
government should not be advocating ANY curriculum for any school
district in the country. NCLB has a lot of good things about it, so far
as we are talking about school reform, but it is coming from the wrong
source. These are local decisions. If California wants to teach Islam
and evolution, that is its right under our nation's constitution. And
if Kansas wants to ban evolution from its schools, that is its right.
Tucents
provides some good analysis in his entry and the subsequent discussion
in the comments box. He does a better job than I could during my week
of "light blogging," so I encourage you to visit.
But this isn't
just about public schools. If this movement were to gain momentum?
Among conservatives? What view of homeschooling does this comment by Indian Cowboy present?
...Third,
should children be allowed to be indoctrinated by their parents? While
I agree that a child is the parents repsonsibility and (for instance)
the parent has every right to keep them out of sex ed and stuff, do you
not think that the outright lying, dissemination, and otherwise
concealment of the truth from kids is not just as big a crime? Fourth,
mroe broadly on education. Parents arent saints. Children are not
adults. Telling a child that his mommy and daddy are responsible for
teaching him, then when hes 18, telling him that no ones going to
help him fill the holes his parents shoddy job did strikes me as a bit
silly. (not that im against homeschooling, just that there are a lot
of parents who wouldnt put any effort into it) Basically youre saying
you dont care if the child is improperly educated for the first 18
years, at which point youll blame that child for the sins of his
parents.
My answer? Uh, well, yes. The parents
absolutely have the right to indoctrinate their own children. Whether
that is in young earth creationism, evolution, alien seeding,
Christianity, Wicca, views on homosexuality or Nazi-ism. Just look in
our constitution. If this thinking is set as a precedent, private
schools also would not be allowed to teach creation nor would
homeschools. Who needs the UN and their Convention on the Rights of the Child?
And
since when has the school system done a good job of properly educating
children for their first 18 years? I think I'm with Tucents on this
one. It is what makes a RINO
(and I mean that with utmose respect and appreciation, Indian
Cowboy...that's why I chose a cute little rhino and not a raging one).
|
|
Post A Comment!
Send to a Friend!
|
Comments
|
Posted by 
Posted by 
Posted by
Jun. 14, 2006 - Untitled Comment
"Telling a child that his mommy and daddy are responsible for teaching him, then when hes 18, telling him that no ones going to help him fill the holes his parents shoddy job did strikes me as a bit silly. (not that im against homeschooling, just that there are a lot of parents who wouldnt put any effort into it) "....blah, blah, yadda yadda
Hmmmmm....so, are we to just feed and clothe our children and keep conversation and interactions to a minimum? Afterall, we are big dopes when it comes to teaching our children. Gee, that our children make it to age 5 and public school kindergarten is a miracle unto itself.
Is Indian Cupboard a conservative? Where does he draw the line at what the govt. is responsible for and what we as parents are responsible for? He sounds like a government programs kinda person.
Where are his stats on the number of hours homeschooling parents put into their child's education?
This is when I want to stick my fingers in my ears and chant, "I'm not listening, I'm not listening" because I get too infuriated reading such sweeping, uneducated criticisms of homeshcooling....and spend too time trying to cool down!