Evolution classes optional under proposed Alberta law

[earth_as_one]

Parents have the right to teach their children at home. If you want to fill their heads full of nonsense go right ahead. If you want to opt your children out of science classes, feel free. I feel bad for children who end up with a medieval understanding of science. But ignorance in the name of religion isn't a new phenomenon.

 

[Tonington]

It's stupid because it requires the school to notify the parents in advance of any subject matter that "explicitly deals with religion". Now in the CBC story they included evolution, even though as I already said that course matter does not explicitly deal with religious subjects.

So, now what happens when the school doesn't notify a parent, and they get upset that they weren't informed that their backwards religious belief that women are inferior was countered with a history class teaching about the suffrage movement?

It's stupid. What if some fundamental parent gets upset that they teach Pi in math as 3.1415 instead of 3.0000 as in the OT?

 

[captain morgan]

Forgive me if I sound redundant, however, there reams of examples that high-light the errors made in religion, philosophy, and yes, science.

Presuming perpetual enlightenment and infallibility is the expectation requires that 'science' is fact (and only fact) and builds exclusively future 'facts' is shallow.

Again, i ask why this is such an issue particularly in light that all provinces offer a form of private/charter school that markets itself on a specific focus like athletics, religious affiliation, language preference or academics... the above issue is only one more alteration to this existing system.

 

[tracy]

It's ridiculous imo. If you attend public school, you have to take a certain amount of science credits. If you take biology, you can't ignore evolution. If you want to ignore it, why choose public school?

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I posted the thread and then I left. It is good to see that many posters get the point, get it why it is such a terrible idea.

If parents want to believe in Creationism, that is their problem. If they want to teach their kids that Darwin was the Disciple of the Devil and the Book of Genesis account, that God created the world 5000 years ago in six days is the true explanation of how the world was created, even that is their business.

However, government must not be any part of this superstition. If students are going to government schools, they must be given correct scientific education. Much as religious right does not want to admit it, Theory of Evolution is accepted as the valid explanation of the origin of life on earth by an overwhelming number of scientists, it is the scientific consensus.

Scientific consensus is usually taught at the school level. That is what public schools should do. It is not their job to cater to each and every religious bias by the parents. Thus let us say my religion tells me that earth is flat. Will I be permitted to keep my kids away from school the day they are teaching that earth is round?

Or my religion says that photosynthesis is a silly superstition, it is the Sun God who gently blows into the plants and turns air into food (my religion also tells me there no such thing as CO2). Will I be allowed to keep my kids home when they are teaching photosynthesis?

If parents don’t want their kids to learn about evolution, they have two choices. Either home school, or send their children to a Fundamentalist Christian Madrasaa. But the government has no business pandering to the extremist, fringe element of the society.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Presuming perpetual enlightenment and infallibility is the expectation requires that 'science' is fact (and only fact) and builds exclusively future 'facts' is shallow.

... the above issue is only one more alteration to this existing system.

That doesn't mean it's right or sensible. Science is not fact and makes no such claim about itself, it's a method of testing the truth content of ideas, and it works. It's the only method we know that works reliably and consistently. Facts and theories are some of its products, they're not science itself, and it's self-correcting in ways religion and philosophy are not and cannot be. Claiming to teach biology while allowing students to be denied knowledge of its core idea and a spectacularly successful example of the method, because of what amounts to Bronze Age superstitions, means the people in charge are pedagogically unfit. It is to utterly fail to teach biology.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Again, i ask why this is such an issue particularly in light that all provinces offer a form of private/charter school that markets itself on a specific focus like athletics, religious affiliation, language preference or academics... the above issue is only one more alteration to this existing system.

Captain, government mandates certain standards, certain curriculum even in private or Charter schools. Thus, in Ontario they probably require that evolution be taught even in private schools. But private school may teach more than the prescribed curriculum. Thus a Fundamentalist Madrasaa may teach Creationism in addition to evolution.

That way even if the kid turns out to be a creationist, at least he has some idea what evolution is about, he is not totally ignorant. If he going to grow up hating evolution, it is only common sense that he should at least know what he is hating.

The way Alberta government is going about; they are going to produce ignoramuses, who wouldn’t have a clue as to what evolution is about. Certainly they can wave goodbye to any chances of studying biology at the university level.

Alberta government, in order to pander to religious right, is doing an irreparable harm to children of its province.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Incidentally, CBC says that these new rules were buried deep into another legislation. Probably Alberta government was hoping to slip it through without people noticing, so that it won’t cause too much controversy.

But I do hope the world press gets hold of this. Alberta is sure to become laughing stock of the world, much as Kansas did a few years ago.

 

[TenPenny]

However, government must not be any part of this superstition. If students are going to government schools, they must be given correct scientific education. Much as religious right does not want to admit it, Theory of Evolution is accepted as the valid explanation of the origin of life on earth by an overwhelming number of scientists, it is the scientific consensus.

This is where you and I differ. You want students to be required to take whatever teaching the school system delivers. I can see that some people might want to opt out of having their kids take certain things.

Your perspective seems to be that whatever the government puts in the curriculum must be required; what would you say if the government decided to teach creationism?

 

[captain morgan]

Incidentally, CBC says that these new rules were buried deep into another legislation. Probably Alberta government was hoping to slip it through without people noticing, so that it won’t cause too much controversy.

Did the CBC happen to mention that they have a massive majority?... They don't have to hide anything in order to get it through the house and, presumably, as they represent the vast majority of the voters, this is what they want.

BTW - No one, so far, has offered any form of reasonable argument as to how this education legislation is different (in principle) from the individual rights' issues that have consumed these forums to date.

You can't stuff the genie back in the bottle once you've let it out.

 

[earth_as_one]

Every time man claimed to understand the true nature of the universe, we've proven ourselves wrong eventually. The world is flat, then it isn't. The Earth is the center of the universe, then its the sun, now its unknown. No scientist would claim that science is absolute or infallible. Science is just the best explanation we have right now based on the evidence.

One day we may discover the earth is indeed flat, when we take into account the other 8 dimensions we can't see.
String theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[earth_as_one]

Even if I was religious (I'm not) I'd want to my children to have the best possible education. That means exposing them to as many ideas as possible.

I always encourage my children to think. I had no problem presenting contradictory ideas especially when it comes to science and religion.

Science can't disprove religion. That would be logically impossible. You can't prove a negative.

However many religious based theories about nature and the universe have been disproven by the evidence, not science.

Is it possible creation theory is right? Sure why couldn't an omnipotent God create the earth complete with a fossil record and geological clues suggesting the earth was billions of years old. If he did that, I'd say he has one hell of a sense of humor.

 

[Cannuck]

It's unfortunate that people have not bothered or taken the time to understand the full issue before commenting. As long as you have a system in place that allows parents to opt out of the public system, the public system will have to be responsive to those parents. The Alberta government is trying to do just that. The real issue is whether parents should be allowed to opt out. I know of 7 year old kids that are looking at 3 hours a day on a school bus because their school may be closing. The options are to force people to use their public school or to make the public school responsive to people's needs. This could just as well be about a basketball program.

 

[Nuggler]

It's a shame that you buy into the ridiculous stereotypes perpetrated all of the 'informed' folks.

It's a shame you're a ridiculous, stereotypical troll, looking for a fight. :thebirdman:

Blow me.

 

[wulfie68]

Thus, in Ontario they probably require that evolution be taught even in private schools. But private school may teach more than the prescribed curriculum. Thus a Fundamentalist Madrasaa may teach Creationism in addition to evolution.

In other words, SirJoseph you don't know the rules in Ontario, and you don't know them in Alberta, so you're just indulging in your ignorant disdain of a province you know next to nothing about. This is not new from you: you did it on the Canada.com forums and you do it here. The fact of the matter is that SirJoseph and his ilk don't like to admit that Albertans are less extreme and closer to the center in their political views than most Liberals of his ilk and use propaganda pieces like this to bolster their view and justfiy looking down their noses.

For the record (as some one born, raised and living in Alberta my entire adult life) I don't know many people in Alberta that would identify with the religious right. Yes, there are religious people here, and yes some of the views are more conservative (socially, especially on justice oriented issues, and fiscally) than other parts of the country. I don't agree with any legislation that tries to promote creationism over evolution as a theory. I have never heard of any Albertans discussing or espousing into that pseudo-scientific bastard child of the American relgious right, so-called "Intelligent Design". I don't agree with sugar coating history curriculums to ignore the rampant war and human suffering caused by the crusades, the protestant reformation, the muslim expansions in the middle east, northern Africa and southeastern Europe and other religiously influenced episodes. Most people in Alberta that I know (including some who are devoutly religious) feel the same way.

 

[earth_as_one]

So your kid takes the bus for three hours each day to attend 6 hours of school, one hour of which they won't attend because their parents want to keep their kids ignorant of evolution. During that hour they can hang out somewhere. I bet they end up picking up some bad habits which lead to them unofficially opting out of most of their other classes.

Father, "Son, did you attend your biology class today?"
Son, "Nah dad, I hung out at the pool hall and smoked a few doobies."
Father, "That's my boy!, I don't want your head to filled up with that mumbo jumbo science quackery"

 

[coldstream]

Evolution is really not a science. It is a philosophical system. The mechanisms that actuate evolution, random genetic mutation that subject themselves to natural selection and survival, is a theory that has developed in a vacuum. It can't explain the origins of life, but it rejects a Creator, and a design, beyond that which is dictated by the laws of survival of the fittest. I don't really have a problem with evolution being taught as a philosophy, in balance with Theistic, or Deistic systems as well. But it should not be taught as a science, relegating everything else to the realm superstition and nonsense.

 

[L Gilbert]

Any course matter that deals explicitly with religion? That's dumb. Evolution doesn't even deal with religion explicitly. Implicitly, yes.

Exactly. Either the article isn't researched well enough, or some people are taking what evolution does deal with rather liberally; perhaps both
I can understand making lifestyle matters (like matters dealing with sexuality outside of the obvious matters of biology) optional, but evolution is not a lifestyle issue. It's a life issue like language, mathematics, etc.
Might as well make physics and chemistry optional.

 

[lone wolf]

How do you explain a tailbone?

 

[earth_as_one]

Evolution is also both a theory and a fact.

Evolution, the mechanism is a fact which has been proven by experiments.

Evolution, the theory of how simple life evolved into more complex life remains the most plausible explanation of what we can observe.

Evolution the theory, does not reject a creator. Evolution and modern geologic theories based on the evidence both reject the accepted Judeo-Christian version of creation.