Wow. Yet another giant step in christian sharia's relentless march to make America Great Again! How absolutely pathetic. Legal endorsement of willful ignorance. https://www.newsweek.com/ohio-student-religious-liberties-act-1472008 NEW OHIO LAW LETS STUDENTS GIVE WRONG ANSWERS ON TESTS FOR RELIGIOUS REASONS
I fail to see where, in that paragraph, it allows the student to be wrong. If a student displays knowledge of evolution and declares God to be the master designer of evolution, would he be wrong in substance and relevance? What if he's Muslim and says that it's Allah's hand that's involved?
I read the text of the legislation. Did you? The articles author and editor interpret the rule very broadly, and seem to have a significant bias. And, what exactly is wrong with that? Let's an article is about taxation and the student brings up Jesus and the "Render Unto Caesar" line. The teacher can't drop his grade for that. Do you think that's a problem?
Yes, the overly broad definition can and will result in the endorsement of willful ignorance being acceptable in an academic environment without any achievement penalty.O No problem at all. OTOH, let's say its an essay on human evolution and the student says 6,000 years ago god created the earth and then used that very same earth to create Adam and Eve. Outrageous nonsense cannot be excused or accepted without academic penalty. I don't equate academic penalty with social penalty. People are free to believe whatever the hell they want. They are not free to insist that their supernatural ancient history of the middle east is academically acceptable.
Well, that's pretty common for legislation across the board. I mean, the original legislation which they merely modified allows for a "moment of silence" if the schools so choose. Why not get up in arms over that? Doesn't that depend on the context? If the class is a science class, then the standards would be toward the correct application of science. If it's an English class, the person's take on evolution would be irrelevant to the quality of the essay.
I didn't see the word "tests" used in the article yet you used it. Sounds like they specified assignments like essays and artwork i.e. homework. So does this apply to tests? If so I would have a problem with it. Afterall a science test is to see if you know what the science says not what your religion says.
Er, I merely used the title of the story. Essays and other kinds of homework require knowledge and accuracy of facts.
If they don't allow children any religious expression in public schools, religious parents are going to put their children in private schools, and the public schools will have their funding necessarily reduced. Don't think they arent concerned about the money...
The plain text of the regulation is clear, and you don't get it. You respond to the headline as if it were true.
That's just because it doesn't agree with your world view. Go and study the evidence so you can understand it.
Which is the book of short fiction, with no shred of proof. And your entire life depends on science, internet, phones, planes, cars, energy, meds, you name it, you use science every minute of your life or you don't have a life. Go back to the cave and see if you enjoy that.
Nothing in my life is dependent upon evolution.. and none of those sciences are either.. The bible has tons of evidence all of which you'll reject. Not because it's unbelievable but because you hate God.
The questions are often inherently biased. 'How did life progress from single celled organisms to todays complex organisms?' The scientifically correct answer is 'we dont know with certainty.' An unbiased question would be 'what is the overwhelmingly prevailing scientific theory on how life progressed from single celled organisms to todays complex organisms through adaptation and mutation, as proposed by Charles Darwin and since supported by a preponderance of archaeological and biological evidence?' The correct answer to that question is 'The theory of evolution.'
none whatsoever. My problem is when religion endorses willful ignorance and rejection of scientific facts and attempts to impose acceptance of such nonsense in public education.
The only people this hurts is the students who's parents have those beliefs. Not a big deal. I taught biology back in the 1990s. At least at the high school level, there was really no time to teach evolution, except here and there as part of teaching something else. It's not a real important point at that level.