Kansas: One Step Forward, but Forty Steps Back
In What's the Matter with Kansas?, American journalist and historian Thomas Frank explores how the Republicans gained political control in the Red States (formerly known as the Midwest), and how the region has become increasingly socially and politically conservative.
Just yesterday, Kansas attempted to enter the 20th Century (still working on the 21st) by allowing local governments to authorize Sunday liquor and beer sales.
However, the Kansas State Board of Education will hear debate on whether evolution should be taught in public schools. Yes, you read that correctly. Evidently learning nothing after enduring national humiliation in 1999 by deleting most references to evolution in the state's science curriculum (which may prove that evolution does not exist, at least in Kansas conservatives), the Kansas Board has once again decided to subject itself to ridicule by scheduling 6 days of courtroom-style hearings to begin Thursday. More than two dozen witnesses will give testimony and be subject to cross-examination, with the majority expected to argue against teaching evolution.
This all seems to be driven (besides by the fact that the Kansas State Boad once again has a conservative majority) by the folks who believe in "intelligent design" or ID (which sounds more scientific). These ID folks believe that evidence supports the conclusion that life on Earth was deliberately designed by one or more intelligent agents. Some folks believe that ID is a mere repackaging of creationism (and that there is no proof of either, which is why it is called "faith," which is why it belongs in a church). At least Creationists give God credit for creating Earth -- the ID folks seem to be saying "Hey - I don't know who did it, but someone must have." Fortunately, religious folks believe in evolution, and this has not been too much of a problem for most of us.
However, Kansas appears to be determined to set the clocks back to 1925. Why is this a problem? Just ask Topeka West High student Stephanie Bailey, a 14-year-old who is skeptical of evolution. "Scientists don't have all the answers," she said. Maybe she thinks the First Amendment goes "too far" also.
Next thing you know, they'll want to change our movies. . .
Just yesterday, Kansas attempted to enter the 20th Century (still working on the 21st) by allowing local governments to authorize Sunday liquor and beer sales.
However, the Kansas State Board of Education will hear debate on whether evolution should be taught in public schools. Yes, you read that correctly. Evidently learning nothing after enduring national humiliation in 1999 by deleting most references to evolution in the state's science curriculum (which may prove that evolution does not exist, at least in Kansas conservatives), the Kansas Board has once again decided to subject itself to ridicule by scheduling 6 days of courtroom-style hearings to begin Thursday. More than two dozen witnesses will give testimony and be subject to cross-examination, with the majority expected to argue against teaching evolution.
This all seems to be driven (besides by the fact that the Kansas State Boad once again has a conservative majority) by the folks who believe in "intelligent design" or ID (which sounds more scientific). These ID folks believe that evidence supports the conclusion that life on Earth was deliberately designed by one or more intelligent agents. Some folks believe that ID is a mere repackaging of creationism (and that there is no proof of either, which is why it is called "faith," which is why it belongs in a church). At least Creationists give God credit for creating Earth -- the ID folks seem to be saying "Hey - I don't know who did it, but someone must have." Fortunately, religious folks believe in evolution, and this has not been too much of a problem for most of us.
However, Kansas appears to be determined to set the clocks back to 1925. Why is this a problem? Just ask Topeka West High student Stephanie Bailey, a 14-year-old who is skeptical of evolution. "Scientists don't have all the answers," she said. Maybe she thinks the First Amendment goes "too far" also.
Next thing you know, they'll want to change our movies. . .
posted by CNB at 4:39 PM
