Missouri Science Takes A Giant Leap Backward?

I am writing to express my dismay about a bill recently introduced into the
Missouri House of Representatives. This is House Bill 911, or the "Missouri
Standard Science Act". One only has to read the summary to realize that this
bill is not about providing an "equal treatment of viewpoints" as much as it
is an attempt to force specific religious beliefs concerning the origins of
life, the Earth and the Universe, on public school students in grades eight
through twelve. This not only goes against the First Amendment separation of
religion from public schools, it goes against any rational idea about
educating students. Religious beliefs should be taught at home or at a house
of worship rather than in a science classroom. Actually this type of
religious education would be more appropriatley taught as a comparative
religion class providing a forum for discussion.



I would go as far as to say that the very idea of this bill represents a
threat to the validity of religion. According to the bill, equal treatment
has to be provided to teach religious beliefs about origins in the science
classroom. Given the definitions of terms and the proposed instructional
requirements of the Bill, it would require that religious teachings about
origins provide the same kind of evidence that the proponents of this bill
seem to feel science needs to prove its validity. How can you prove or
disprove the existence of a God, or that there was actually a Jesus. You
don't. You just accept it as part of your faith.



How can a faith-based belief in the origins of life be compared to the
scientific evidence about such origins? Granted, there is a kind of faith in
science. That is to say there is faith in knowing that the evidence
presented in a situation or circumstance has met stringent qualifications
before that situation or circumstance is considered to be scientific. On the
other hand there are no qualifications for faith-based beliefs in the origin
of life other than faith, as there should be no need for proof. There is
therefore a huge difference between the two kinds of faith.



In my book one does not ask for proof when speaking of faith, however
questioning in science is and should always be done. Quite frankly, one
cannot evolve and adapt if one does not ask questions.



Missouri House Bill 911, the "Missouri Standard Science Act" may be read or
downloaded from this web address,
http://www.house.state.mo.us/bills041/bills/HB911.htm . There is also
contact information to the seven Representatives sponsoring the Bill,
including Kansas City Representative Susan C. Phillips. If you would like to
post your comments publicly please visit the web site I have set up for
discussion about the "Missouri Standard Science Act" at this web address,
http://www.free-thinking.currentsky.com .



Clear Skies...



Bob Riddle

Starwalk, Inc.

http://currentsky.com

"Bob Riddle" wrote in message
...
I am writing to express my dismay about a bill recently introduced into
the
Missouri House of Representatives. This is House Bill 911, or the
"Missouri
Standard Science Act". One only has to read the summary to realize that
this
bill is not about providing an "equal treatment of viewpoints" as much as
it
is an attempt to force specific religious beliefs concerning the origins
of
life, the Earth and the Universe, on public school students in grades
eight
through twelve. This not only goes against the First Amendment separation
of
religion from public schools, it goes against any rational idea about
educating students. Religious beliefs should be taught at home or at a
house
of worship rather than in a science classroom. Actually this type of
religious education would be more appropriatley taught as a comparative
religion class providing a forum for discussion.

And if this weren't a blatant attempt to force a religious viewpoint onto
students, the "equal treatment of viewpoints" idea is utter nonsense . . .
as though all theories---whether fanciful or well-supported---have exactly
the same validity! Not really the sort of thing one wants to encourage in
its itself . . .

R

"Bob Riddle" wrote in message
...
I am writing to express my dismay about a bill recently introduced into
the
Missouri House of Representatives. This is House Bill 911, or the
"Missouri
Standard Science Act". One only has to read the summary to realize that
this
bill is not about providing an "equal treatment of viewpoints" as much as
it
is an attempt to force specific religious beliefs concerning the origins
of
life, the Earth and the Universe, on public school students in grades
eight
through twelve.

I suppose under "equal treatment of viewpoints" they should give Velikovsky
equal time as well :-(


This not only goes against the First Amendment separation of
religion from public schools, it goes against any rational idea about
educating students. Religious beliefs should be taught at home or at a
house
of worship rather than in a science classroom. Actually this type of
religious education would be more appropriatley taught as a comparative
religion class providing a forum for discussion.



I would go as far as to say that the very idea of this bill represents a
threat to the validity of religion. According to the bill, equal treatment
has to be provided to teach religious beliefs about origins in the science
classroom. Given the definitions of terms and the proposed instructional
requirements of the Bill, it would require that religious teachings about
origins provide the same kind of evidence that the proponents of this bill
seem to feel science needs to prove its validity. How can you prove or
disprove the existence of a God, or that there was actually a Jesus. You
don't. You just accept it as part of your faith.



How can a faith-based belief in the origins of life be compared to the
scientific evidence about such origins? Granted, there is a kind of faith
in
science. That is to say there is faith in knowing that the evidence
presented in a situation or circumstance has met stringent qualifications
before that situation or circumstance is considered to be scientific. On
the
other hand there are no qualifications for faith-based beliefs in the
origin
of life other than faith, as there should be no need for proof. There is
therefore a huge difference between the two kinds of faith.



In my book one does not ask for proof when speaking of faith, however
questioning in science is and should always be done. Quite frankly, one
cannot evolve and adapt if one does not ask questions.



Missouri House Bill 911, the "Missouri Standard Science Act" may be read
or
downloaded from this web address,
http://www.house.state.mo.us/bills041/bills/HB911.htm . There is also
contact information to the seven Representatives sponsoring the Bill,
including Kansas City Representative Susan C. Phillips. If you would like
to
post your comments publicly please visit the web site I have set up for
discussion about the "Missouri Standard Science Act" at this web address,
http://www.free-thinking.currentsky.com .



Clear Skies...



Bob Riddle

Starwalk, Inc.

http://currentsky.com

On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 16:55:23 +0000, Bob Riddle wrote:

I am writing to express my dismay about a bill recently introduced into
the Missouri House of Representatives. This is House Bill 911, or the
"Missouri Standard Science Act". One only has to read the summary to
realize that this bill is not about providing an "equal treatment of
viewpoints" as much as it is an attempt to force specific religious
beliefs concerning the origins of life, the Earth and the Universe, on
public school students in grades eight through twelve. This not only goes

snip

Surely this discussion more properly belong in soc.culture.american or
alt.religious.??? or any of the numerous created for this subject.

I'm not saying I disagree with your point, I just don't think its relevant
to alt.astronomy