Schools Req'd to notify parents before teaching evolution

[Rerun]

Next thing you know, they'll be puting "certain" books in a "restricted" section of the school library, where you have to have your parents permission before entering.

....... or perhaps just banning them from the library altogether so impressionable young minds don't accidentally pick them up and start reading them.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by John Doe

I disagree. This is a specific law being brought forward by the Conservative government. It is definitely a conservative issue. Not one of the parties to the left of the Conservatives would introduce this bill.

Agree to disagree. The Liberals would eventually fold too.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Agree to disagree. The Liberals would eventually fold too.

On other issues, maybe. Not on this one. This is a religious right issue. They are the domain of the Conservatives and further right parties.

[Eric Vail]

First off, I want to say that I have a science major with my Bachelor's degree, and by no means do I have problems with the theory of evolution.

That said, it is somewhat surprising that many on this board who attest to not letting government tell us what to think want the government to have the last say in this issue and parents to have their rights taken away. Parents are the primary educators of their children and deserve to decide what they want their kids exposed to. As far as evolution goes, is there really a strong voice saying that they don't want evolution taught in schools in Alberta? I don't hear it. As far as high school science goes, the answer is simple. If you don't want to study evolution, don't take biology. It is not a required course. If you do take biology, then you are required to learn about evolution because it is a scientific theory that is extremely important to the study of biology. You don't have to believe in evolution, but you do need to understand what the theory says. This solution may not be as easy in other grade levels, but I suspect a solution could be found.

It sounds like that what this legislation is really about is "subject-matter that deals explicitly with religion, sexuality or sexual orientation". To me as a parent, there are lots of things that could be taught in this realm that I am not sure I would be comfortable with. I feel I should have the final say in what my child learns. I don't want a teacher telling my six year old in grade one that there are many different kinds of families: ones with one mommy and one daddy, ones with two daddies, ones with two mommies. You can choose the kind of family you will want one day. I don't want this introduced in grade 1 and there are all kinds of moral implications that do not need to be dealt with for six year olds.

To take away a parent's rights to choose their children's education in the areas of sexuality, sexual orientation, or religion makes the government very Orwellian in my books.

[Rerun]

I've voted for the Progressive Conservative Party in Alberta ever since Peter Lougheed was Premier. Last year, I decided to change my vote because I didn't like Ed Stelmach and also because I was disappointed in the direction that the Progressive Conservative Party was heading, and had been heading for the past few years under King Ralph. (Progressive... now thats and oxymoron if there ever was one)

So, I held my nose, and voted Liberal. I thought, based on all the voter grumbling and the current and most recent past policies of the PC's, a lot of staunch Conservative voters would do likewise.

Boy was I shocked.

I wish more people had done like I did. Ed Stelmach is an idiot and his policies are an embarrassment to Albertans. Oh well, what can you expect when we elect an uneducated farmer as our Premier.

[Calgaryborn]

Mommy and Daddy made little Johnny and Jane. They invest vast chunks of their lives and wealth in raising Johnny and Jane. They do their best for Johnny and Jane. There is no way the State should force these dedicated parents to attend any training or educational class that they are opposed to. If any of you have better ideas on how a child should be raised get your own!

The problem most parents have with some one they don't know teaching things like the origin of life or sexuality is the way it will be presented. Micro evolution doesn't prove macro evolution. Nor does it explain chemical evolution or the vast gaps in the fossil record. If Photon is your teacher you won't here such things. As a parent I have a big problem with that.

By Alberta legistating notification of parents when these hot button issues come up they are allowing many parents a comfort level which might allow them to leave their children in public school. This benefits Alberta because the declining enrollment rates (due to people having less children) effects schools abilities to offer educational choices. Homeschoolers which are growing in numbers compound enrollment problems. It's a good compromise.

[flamingreen]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Micro evolution doesn't prove macro evolution. Nor does it explain chemical evolution or the vast gaps in the fossil record. If Photon is your teacher you won't here such things. As a parent I have a big problem with that.

You wouldn't hear it from him because it isn't even remotely correct.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by John Doe

I disagree. This is a specific law being brought forward by the Conservative government. It is definitely a conservative issue. Not one of the parties to the left of the Conservatives would introduce this bill.

I'm a (c)onservative. I've never voted for the PC Party in my entire life. No, this is a bunch of hayseed rednecks from Northern Alberta letting a small minority of religious zealots put policy forward.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Mommy and Daddy made little Johnny and Jane. They invest vast chunks of their lives and wealth in raising Johnny and Jane. They do their best for Johnny and Jane. There is no way the State should force these dedicated parents to attend any training or educational class that they are opposed to. If any of you have better ideas on how a child should be raised get your own!

Public education is a baseline education to ensure people have enough education to be productive members of society, if parents can pick and choose what they want taught, where do you draw the line?

What if I don't want my kid to learn math. Grammar. How to write.

Maybe we should just put kids in a big daycare until they're 18, not learn anything?

Why should anyone be afraid of their child learning about something different at an age appropriate level?

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

The problem most parents have with some one they don't know teaching things like the origin of life or sexuality is the way it will be presented.

It's presented according to the approved curriculum. All a parent has to do is look at that.

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Micro evolution doesn't prove macro evolution. Nor does it explain chemical evolution or the vast gaps in the fossil record. If Photon is your teacher you won't here such things. As a parent I have a big problem with that.

If I was teaching it I'd present the reality of current scientific understanding, including the evidences for "macro" evolution, chemical evolution, the huge amount of DNA evidence, and the completeness of the fossil record. The problem is your understanding isn't accurate, so you have a problem because I wouldn't be teaching the problems you think exist but actually don't.

You're the one who claims evolution is a conspiracy by scientists, which makes any opinion you express about evolution questionable.

As I said, where do you draw the line. Should any parent be able to withdraw their child from any topic they don't like?

What about exams? If little Billy fails because mom and dad decided to pull him out of a class, what then?

What about entry requirements into university? How can a university accept a student that met the 85% mark requirement in Biology, but maybe that student got a free pass in a big chunk of the class.

It's a huge can of worms with no actual benefit.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by Eric Vail

I don't want a teacher telling my six year old in grade one that there are many different kinds of families: ones with one mommy and one daddy, ones with two daddies, ones with two mommies. You can choose the kind of family you will want one day. I don't want this introduced in grade 1 and there are all kinds of moral implications that do not need to be dealt with for six year olds.

To take away a parent's rights to choose their children's education in the areas of sexuality, sexual orientation, or religion makes the government very Orwellian in my books.

For the first part, why don't you want your child to learn about the different kinds of families? One of the first things children are taught about is their communities and how they fit in, including concepts like families. Do you suggest that we don't teach them at all about families, or lie to them and only teach about the ones with one mommy and one daddy?

As for the second part, the parents do have the right to choose their childrens' education. The government is allowing and funding home schooling and private schooling. What the government is doing here is passing their responsibilities onto the schools (again).

[Thor]

If a 6yr old learns about same sex couples that child will obviously grow up gay or damaged somehow. Duh.

[Phaneuf3]

Originally Posted by Thor

If a 6yr old learns about same sex couples that child will obviously grow up gay or damaged somehow. Duh.

If gay marriage is legalized it means that straight marriage becomes illegal.


edit: but back on topic, this is seriously shameful. I'm willing to admit that I voted for them thinking they'd be the lesser of two (or 4) evils... never again.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by peter12

I'm a (c)onservative. I've never voted for the PC Party in my entire life. No, this is a bunch of hayseed rednecks from Northern Alberta letting a small minority of religious zealots put policy forward.

You are mistaken if you think all the hayseed rednecks are from Northern Alberta. Do you think this wouldn't have happened if Ted Morton would have won the Conservative leadership?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by John Doe

You are mistaken if you think all the hayseed rednecks are from Northern Alberta. Do you think this wouldn't have happened if Ted Morton would have won the Conservative leadership?

I don't know Ted Morton, but I know one of his closest friends and I can probably guess not. Ted Morton may be a "conservative" but he's also one of the most highly respected constitutional and charter experts/political scientists in the country.

[schteve_d]

This reinforces one of my favourite quotes by Mark Twain:

"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education".

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Thor

If a 6yr old learns about same sex couples that child will obviously grow up gay or damaged somehow. Duh.

And we don't want that!!!!!

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by photon

Public education is a baseline education to ensure people have enough education to be productive members of society, if parents can pick and choose what they want taught, where do you draw the line?

What if I don't want my kid to learn math. Grammar. How to write.

Maybe we should just put kids in a big daycare until they're 18, not learn anything?

I draw the line to the parents. They have ultimate say in what is being taught their children.

Originally Posted by photon

Why should anyone be afraid of their child learning about something different at an age appropriate level?



It's presented according to the approved curriculum. All a parent has to do is look at that.

Age appropriate? Approved curriculum? Who decides? Those are parental decisions. Also, teachers like scientists don't live in a bubble. They have biases just like you and me. Even if they try to put them aside and just present the required facts it will show through.

Originally Posted by photon

If I was teaching it I'd present the reality of current scientific understanding, including the evidences for "macro" evolution, chemical evolution, the huge amount of DNA evidence, and the completeness of the fossil record. The problem is your understanding isn't accurate, so you have a problem because I wouldn't be teaching the problems you think exist but actually don't.

I love how you coined that phrase: "the reality of current scientific understanding". The fact is "current scientific understanding" is different than past scientific understanding and certainly will conflict with future scientific understanding. You can't say that it is evolving either because things that used to be part of scientific reality have proved to be categorically wrong. Certainly some things that today are part of the reality of current scientific understanding will tomorrow meet a simular end. My problem with you teaching my kids would be that you would fail to explain or they would fail to grasp the difference between "reality" and "the reality of current scientific understanding". I'm not even sure that you grasp it yourself. I want my boys to question current scientific understanding; not use it as their final authority.

Originally Posted by photon

You're the one who claims evolution is a conspiracy by scientists, which makes any opinion you express about evolution questionable.

I claim that scientists and especially scientific educators are both closed minded and hostile to anyone who questions certain aspects of their current scientific understanding. Evolution and Global warming come quickly to mind as examples. In their minds the debate is over. Their minds are closed.

Originally Posted by photon

As I said, where do you draw the line. Should any parent be able to withdraw their child from any topic they don't like?

Yes.

Originally Posted by photon

What about exams? If little Billy fails because mom and dad decided to pull him out of a class, what then?
What about entry requirements into university? How can a university accept a student that met the 85% mark requirement in Biology, but maybe that student got a free pass in a big chunk of the class.

It's a huge can of worms with no actual benefit.

In recent years many homeschoolers have faired very well on SAT's in the states. Many of these students were taught creation right along side evolution in their homes. Again they recieved the facts of evolution along with the questions that evolution fails to answer. I know a women in her 30's who has a doctorate in immunology(sp) and is currently working in that field who believes in a young earth and a Creator. She just had to be silent about her beliefs and toll the party line with most of her Professors. She was educated in the States and encountered many who where hostile towards Christian beliefs in general and certainly about the idea of a Creator. If your worried about educational opportunity you should concern yourself more with the state of our Colleges and Universities. They should be a place where a Christian or practicing Jew feels as comfortable as an Atheist.

[mustache ride]

Come and worship at the church of evolution. This is a commission based religion so you get what you put in. Looking for people to hate, we can help.* Looking for others to ridicule, we have those too. Why not start your own inquisition now. Never has being non inclusive been so fun. Come before the dogma of evolution and bow down.



*Currently it is only acceptable to ridicule white christian types. We are working on it but it might take some time before we can hate the non white Christians openly. Thanks for your patience.

[troutman]

Hitchens on the debate in Texas:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/191400

It's not just that the overwhelming majority of scientists are now convinced that evolution is inscribed in the fossil record and in the lineaments of molecular biology. It is more that evolutionists will say in advance which evidence, if found, would refute them and force them to reconsider. ("Rabbit fossils in the pre-Cambrian layer" was, I seem to remember, the response of Prof. J.B.S. Haldane.) Try asking an "intelligent design" advocate to stipulate upfront what would constitute refutation of his world view and you will easily see the difference between the scientific method and the pseudoscientific one.

This is the difference between science and dogma.

[Phaneuf3]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

I claim that scientists and especially scientific educators are both closed minded and hostile to anyone who questions certain aspects of their current scientific understanding. Evolution and Global warming come quickly to mind as examples. In their minds the debate is over. Their minds are closed.

I'm sure if you brought some evidence to the table that had a scientific basis that proved certain parts of the evolutionary theory wrong scientists would be all over it.


I think that religious education is important and should be in schools - perhaps as part of their social studies program. It would probably do a lot of good. However, unless its science, keep it out of the science classroom. More importantly - don't prevent science from being taught in science class.

edit: just to clarify - I'm advocating teaching about several religions, not saying students should be indoctrinated into one particular religion or anything like that.