Palin said NO to creationist teaching in schools 1

 The lie that Sarah Palin wants creationism taught in schools is going round the world. 

Little Green Footballs continues to try and put the record straight:

Once again, we see the mainstream media clinging to this “creationism” distortion; the fact is that Sarah Palin explicitly said she would not push to have creationism taught alongside evolution: Sarah Palin and Creationism.

“I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum.”

She added that, if elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state’s required curriculum.

 

Posted under Commentary by Jillian Becker on Thursday, September 25, 2008

Tagged with , , ,

This post has 1 comment.

Permalink
  • dabuckna@direct.ca

    In a 2006 gubernatorial debate, Sarah Palin said evolution and creationism should both be taught in public schools. But in an interview the following
    day with the Anchorage Daily News, Palin said:

    http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/story/8347904p-8243554c.html

    ***
    …she meant only to say that discussion of alternative views should be
    allowed to arise in Alaska classrooms:

    “I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up
    in class. It doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum.”

    She added that, if elected, she would not push the state Board of
    Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state’s required
    curriculum.
    ***
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,425161,00.html

    Exclusive: Gov. Palin on ‘Hannity & Colmes,’ Part 2

    Thursday, September 18, 2008

    HANNITY: Did you only want to teach creationism in school and not
    evolution? PALIN: No. In fact, growing up in a school teacher’s house with
    a science teacher as a dad, you know, I have great respect for science
    being taught in our science classes and evolution to be taught in our
    science classes. ====================================================
    Teaching Evolution – Is There a Better Way?
    by Ian Taylor
    http://www.creationmoments.net/articles/article.php?a=21

    Should Evolution Be Immune From Critical Analysis?
    by David Buckna
    http://www.rae.org/critanl.html

    Teaching Origins in Public Schools
    by David Menton
    http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/teach.htm
    ===================================================
    David Menton bio:

    * Biomedical research technician at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota in
    the Department of Dermatology (1960-62)
    * Associate Professor of Anatomy at Washington University School of
    Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri (1966-2000)
    * Associate Professor Emeritus of Anatomy at Washington University School
    of Medicine (July 2000)
    ===================================================
    http://www.rae.org/critanl.html

    [snip]

    Dr. David N. Menton is a former Associate Professor of Anatomy, Washington
    University School of Medicine in St. Louis, now retired. In his September
    1995 address (“Evolution: Is a scientific critique possible?”) at the
    Abbey Arts Centre in Abbotsford, British Columbia, Menton commented:

    “What I’m suggesting in the classroom is: not teaching creation. What I’m
    suggesting you consider in the classroom is: teach evolution the way your
    Minister of Education says you ought to–teach the curriculum the way they
    say you ought to. I believe in obeying the laws. I didn’t come here to
    tell you to get yourself thrown out of a job or anything like that…Do
    what you’re asked to do.”

    “But there isn’t anyone that’s going to stop you from presenting critical
    evidence against evolution. No one.”

    “I eagerly look forward to the first test case in court, where they drag a
    teacher kicking and screaming into the courts who has done the job they’re
    supposed to do. They’ve taught evolution–they’ve covered the
    curriculum–they’ve covered the points in the book–but they also
    presented scientific evidence that is critical of these evolutionary
    views–evidence generated by other evolutionists themselves. I’m
    waitingfor the court case when they take that person in the school and
    say: ‘You have no right presenting scientific evidence from evolutionists
    critical of evolution.'”

    “I’ll tell you–the approach that is being taken here guarantees one
    thing…you’re guaranteeing this course is going to be boring–you’re
    going to teach evolution as a ‘Just So Story’. Anyone with dissenting
    points of view is going to get crushed. They’re either going to go along
    with the evolutionary paradigm, or be told that they can’t speak out;
    they’re not going to win that round, and neither will you. You’re going to
    bore your kids silly.”

    [snip]
    ======================================================
    The following suggested Origins of Life policy, which first appeared in
    the Buckna/Laidlaw article, “Should evolution be immune from critical
    analysis in the science classroom?” (http://www.icr.org/article/411/) is a
    realistic, practical and legal way for local and state school boards to
    achieve a win-win with regard to evolution teaching. Even the ACLU, the
    NCSE, and Americans United for the Separation of Church and State should
    find the policy acceptable:

    “As no theory in science is immune from critical examination and
    evaluation, and recognizing that evolutionary theory is the only approved
    theory of origins that can be taught in the [province/state] science
    curriculum: whenever evolutionary theory is taught, students and teachers
    are encouraged to discuss the scientific information that supports and
    questions evolution and its underlying assumptions, in order to promote
    the development of critical thinking skills. This discussion would include
    only the scientific evidence/information for and against evolutionary
    theory, as it seeks to explain the origin of the universe and the
    diversity of life on our planet.”