One of the ironies of the evolution debate is that if those changes get implemented, Texas will get out-competed by smarter, fitter states whose education systems evolve to keep up with the latest science.
Not too long ago, the right-wingers unreasonably went berserk over President Obama’s speech to schoolchildren across the country. These right-wingers claimed indoctrination. However, these conservatives, republicans, right wingers, or whatever you want to call them, with their narrow ideology, are uncompromising and the true harbingers of indoctrination.
Recently, the Texas State Board of Education decided to look “at adding mentions of contemporary conservatives Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh to the required curriculum standards.” From TPMMuckraker:
Now, a panel of experts appointed by the GOP-controlled State Board of Education has released reviews of the proposed curriculum, which, as we noted recently, would require students to be conversant in Reaganomics and the heroes of movement conservatism.
More from TPMMuckraker:
While Republicans are busy gnashing their teeth over President Obama’s imminent indoctrination of the nation’s schoolchildren, there’s an education story bubbling up in Texas that could have considerably more far-reaching consequences.
. . .
Approved textbooks, the standards say, must teach the Texan student to “identify significant conservative advocacy organizations and individuals, such as Newt Gingrich, Phyllis Schlafly, and the Moral Majority.” No analogous liberal figures or groups are required, prompting protests from some legislators and committee members. (Read an excerpt here.)
The standards on Nixon: “describe Richard M. Nixon’s role in the normalization of relations with China and the policy of detente.”
On Reagan: “describe Ronald Reagan’s role in restoring national confidence, such as Reaganomics and Peace with Strength.” (That’s it.)
The Cold War section is rendered as “U.S. responses to Soviet aggression after World War II … “
Texas State Board of Education chairman Dan McLeroy—a creationist—wants to teach children both the strengths and weaknesses of the theory of evolution. From Salon:
Dan McLeroy, the Texas State Board of Education chairman, a dentist and self-described creationist, led the charge to mandate teaching the “strengths and weaknesses” of the theory of evolution. After three days of high-pitched argument on both sides, the 15-member board, by a vote of 8-7, rejected the language, relieving textbook authors and publishers of the pressure to insert what opponents called “junk science” into their pages. But in a compromise that alarms and dismays many science education advocates, the board did adopt language that attempts to cast a shadow of doubt over the validity of the central evolutionary concepts of natural selection and common ancestry.
Proponents of the theory of intelligent design, and other brands of neo-creationism, argue that evolution is inadequate to the job of explaining the diversity and history of life on earth. If they can cast doubts about evolution’s validity, they have a chance to fill the authority vacuum with the tenets of creationism. But since late 2005, when a federal judge in Dover, Pa., ruled that intelligent design was a form of creationism, and that its introduction into public high school curricula was unconstitutional, advocates of teaching neo-creationism have been forced to seek other ways into public science classrooms. Enter the “strengths and weaknesses” strategy, crafted by the Seattle-based, pro-intelligent-design think thank, Discovery Institute.
—
Photo source for attribution. The author or licensor of this image does not endorse my work or me and their image is protected under an attribution license.
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
:: 
