A Fact Sheet About The Louisiana Science Education Act
Posted on September 21, 2010 by Zack Kopplin
Fact Sheet on the LSEA
Please join our campaign to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act, R.S. 17:285.1, which was passed by the Louisiana Legislature in 2008. Simply put, the intent of this law is to allow the teaching of Creationism, including Intelligent Design, in public school science classes in Louisiana.
- Teaching Creationism, which is a religious belief, is in clear violation of Supreme Court rulings on the subject (one of which, Edwards v. Aguillard, originated in Louisiana). (ncse.com/creationism/legal/intelligent-design-trial-kitzmiller-v-dover)
- The young people of Louisiana deserve the best possible scientific education. Creationism is not science, and teaching it as science leaves our students at a disadvantage when competing for jobs in the global economy. (ncse.com/evolution/why-teach-evolution)
- The teaching of Evolution is sound science and is also compatible with religious faith, a position that is supported by all mainstream religious denominations. (ncse.com/media/voices/religion)
- The Louisiana Science Education Act costs jobs. The Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology cancelled its 2011 convention in New Orleans to protest this law (www.sicb.org/resources/LouisianaLetterJindal.pdf). How many others will do the same? How many businesses will locate elsewhere because they want well trained scientists? How many researchers will take their talents elsewhere or never come to Louisiana because of this anti-science law?
- The bill is already producing its intended result. The Livingston Parish School Board is taking steps to act on the legislation’s goals. According to an account in the July 24, 2010, Baton Rouge Advocate, board member David Tate said: “We let them teach evolution to our children, but I think all of us sitting up here on this School Board believe in Creationism. Why can’t we get someone with religious beliefs to teach Creationism?” Fellow board member Clint Mitchell responded, “I agree … Teachers should have the freedom to look at creationism and find a way to get it into the classroom.” (www.2theadvocate.com/news/99153999.html)
How you can help:
- Join our “Repeal Louisiana’s Creationism Law” campaign on Facebook to get updates. www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=153200924708392&ref=ts
- Organize civic and student groups like science clubs to pass resolutions endorsing a repeal of this misguided law. (please email a copy of your endorsement letter to RepealCreationism@gmail.com)
This entry was posted in Creationism, Fact Sheet, Intelligent Design, Livingston Parish, LSEA. Bookmark the permalink.
26 Responses to A Fact Sheet About The Louisiana Science Education Act
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance
Thomas Jefferson
What creationists call evidence against evolution is usually missing information. Incompleteness is in fact an important characteristic of science.
Keep up the good work.
Pingback: Press Release: The Repeal is Public! | Repealing the Louisiana Science Education Act--Creationism in Disguise
Pingback: Louisiana Coalition for Science » The Repeal Effort Has Begun: Repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act
Sincere thanks to Mr. Kopplin for allowing comments and responses.
(1) If the Louisiana Science Education Act violates any Supreme Court rulings (including “Edwards”), it seems very odd that evolutionists haven’t filed suit already.
(2) Multiple major incompatibilities exist between evolution and Christianity. While giving due respect to previous Supreme Court decisions, the existence of such incompatibilities would naturally be of interest and importance. Here’s a summary:
cjonline.com/interact/blog/contra_mundum/2010-05-22/two_religions_part_two
A couple things.
There must be a plaintiff brave enough to come out, and put their name on the legal papers. Once they do that, they will face threats and harassment, and their kids in school may face even worse. Court cases take time, if we cannot succeed with the repeal, the law will eventually be declared unconstitutional, it just may take years and years.
Second, evolution and Christianity are not incompatible. I would suggest you visit the NCSE’s list of religious organizations endorsing evolution, ncse.com/media/voices/religion.
Regardless of how many religious organizations endorse evolution, religion still promotes the idea that you can obtain certain knowledge without testing or evidence. That is the exact opposite of science and as much as I admire Eugenie Scott and the rest of the crew at NCSE I could just strangle the lot of them for talking past this very important point just to maintain an unneeded relationship with the faithful. The children in Louisiana need to have a broad, fact based education and I don’t see that happening if we keep allowing a group of thoughtless egomaniacs to sabotage that effort for the sake of indoctrination into iron age mythology.
Zachary-
I just wanted to give you a word of encouragement, here. This work that you are doing is of utmost importance to the integrity of science education in our nation. I’m a Texan, so I know firsthand the frustration of dealing with theocrats who want to deny people their right to a secular education by hijacking the public education system. Their behavior is outrageous and disrespectful not only to people in science and social studies, but also to people who practice mainstream Christianity.
Keep up the excellent work!
Thank you! I sympathize with you. Keep fighting the good fight against the new Texas bill.
Pingback: The Campaign to Repeal the Creationist “Academic Freedom” Law in Louisiana « The Skeptical Teacher
Wanted to echo LRA’s words and congratulate your noble efforts on repealing this rediculous amendment. I am a Texas resident as well and am all too aware of the fundamentalist’s efforts to force their religious interpretations into public school science curriculums. Its a battle that is truly worth fighting and I support your movement 100%.
Thank you, good luck with your own battles!
Pingback: Temple of the Future
Pingback: Louisiana Science “Education” Act « "My religion is to do good."
Mr. Kopplin,
The legislation you’re fighting doesn’t tell anyone they can teach creationism in schools. If some are doing that, then address those who are in violation of Edwards v. Aquillard – don’t toss the baby out with the bath water. The LSEA does teach students to approach science skeptically even if certain theories or models are now widely accepted; geocentrism was widely accepted by scientists in Galileo’s day but skepticism and critical analysis caused it to go the way of phlogiston! By attempting to insulate the theory of microbes-to-man evolution from critical inquiry, you’re actually leaving science and even education far behind. When you insist on presenting fish-to-philosopher evolution in schools in an uncritical, rosy, and one-sided manner, you’re engaging in indoctrination, not education. Instead of teaching science, you’re relating dogma.
It’s hubris to suggest that no one has legally challenged the LSEA because such an act would apparently require an act of martyrdom. No courage is required to initiate something that would only gain you the backing of the major scientific organizations with a presuppositional commitment to microbes-to-man evolution – only thick skin. It hasn’t been challenged because it’s not unConstitutional; it contains specific language to forbid teaching religion. But the Darwin Faithful cannot allow their theory to suffer critical analysis and that’s why folks like you and atheist Dr. Michael Zimmerman fight against a key concepts of the scientific method [skeptical and critical analysis and the non-static nature of scientific knowledge] in order to maintain a High Wall of Protection around the it!
As to your charge that evolution and Christianity are compatible, you could not be more mistaken. Evolutionary views may be imposed upon Scripture but only at the expense of tossing out traditional, apostolic doctrines. In other words, it is not compatible with historical Christianity nor with Biblical revelation. Those who impose evolutionary interpretations upon Scripture must do so by significantly editing Scriptural revelation and therefore by significantly altering Christian doctrine and theology. I’ve exposed the fact that the signatures on atheist Dr Michael Zimmerman’s pro-evolution Clergy Letter are all largely from liberal, mainline denominations who long ago abandoned historical Christianity (some of the “clergy” on his letter do not even meet the basic requirements of a Christian, such as a belief in the historical, physical resurrection of Jesys Christ, and thus are clergy in name only) and from recognized cults like the Unity “church.”
I urge you to stand up for reason, education and science by abandoning this misguided quest to keep science from being taught critically in the classroom. It should not matter in the slightest whether you feel there is a scientific alternative to evolution; if a scientific claim cannot stand up to critical analysis it should be thrown out with phlogiston and geocentrism!
You’re not fighting against creationism, you’re fighting against skeptical scientific inquiry.
Regards,
Rev Tony Breeden
Founder of CreationLetter.com and the Creation Sunday Movement
Rev. Breechen, you know as well as I do that the intent of this law is to sneak creationism into the public school science classroom. You don’t need to look further than Sen. Ben Nevers’ quotes to find proof.
I have been taught in all my science classes, since elementary school, that Scientific Theories are just that – Theories! As a teacher, I will teach my students the same thing. I don’t need any kind of law to tell me to do so, its what science teachers have always done! Scientists are always open to, looking for, and testing new theories. Even Scientific Laws are not 100% proven, and are able to be disproven by contradicting evidence. It is the current known evidence that leads to the Law. Here is one of many articles explaining laws and theories for you, and others who may not know: chemistry.about.com/od/chemistry101/a/lawtheory.htm
In addition, you are the one saying “Christianity” is not compatible with Science. So, we’re back to Christianity being the only correct answer. Intelligent Design is only for Christians? Other people of faith can’t believe that there is a “higher power” that created it all? The bible is the only source for creationism? Many educated people who know the Theory of Evolution are also people of faith- many faiths and beliefs. If this is about your Christian Ideology, then you loose, for the specific fact that your only evidence is the Bible. For the record, your “ad logicum” comments do not make you seem smarter, only snooty.
Lee,
Your reply is precisely why I bemoan the educational system in the US. You handilly display a level of ignorance on what a theoiry really is that you are doing Zack’s job for him. A theory is much more important than a fact, because it explains things.
I’d gladly invite you to test “only a theory” of gravity next time you are at the top of a sky scraper. If anything, we know much, much more about evolution than we do about gravity, for what it’s worth.
Revered Breeden,
Despite your penchant for ten dollar words, you clearly don’t understand the difference between science and theology, or between theory and dogma. Maybe the fact that you received your education from a non-accredited post-secondary institution precludes you from grasping these key differences. Or maybe your insecurity in your own faith drives you to assert scientific evidence where clearly none exists.
I find it laughable that you would use geocentrism to make a point about critical analysis and skepticism. Do you forget that the Christian church was so threatened by heliocentrism that Galileo himself was found “vehemently suspect of heresy”, was forced to publicly recant his theory, and spent the last nine years of his life imprisoned? To assert that teaching creationism in the classroom is critical analysis of the same bend that allowed for the advancement of science in the 1500’s is hypocrisy of the worst kind.
Let’s continue on with your reference to geocentrism. This is a theory that is support by biblical text in Psalms 93:1, 96:10, 104:5, in 1 Chronicles 16:30, and Ecclesiastes 1:5. Do you argue, then, that we should return to teaching geocentrism in the scientific classroom based on “critical analysis” of biblical text? Or do you admit that the clear scientific evidence that the world does in fact move, and that the sun does not actually “return” anywhere – since it never actually moves from its original place – disprove what the bible states?
If faith and science are incompatible, how do you explain your acceptance of the planets movement around the sun, despite biblical text to the contrary? Or do you believe that the sun moves around the earth?
Ad logicum, indeed.
Mr. Kopplin,
You have in fact ignored my points. You appear to be commiting an ad logicum, supposing that by refuting one piece of my rebuttal that you need not address other independent supports. Since you do not value critical thinking [at least where it concerns microbes-to-man evolution], I’ll forgive you the fallacy of logic and instea dpoint out that even if Sen. Nevers had intended this legislation to sneak in creationism, such a Trojan horse action would be futile, precisely because Edwards v. Aguillard negates the possibility of the LSEA being used to teach either ID or creationism; thus, even if Nevers intended the LSEA as a Creation Trojan Horse, his efforts were doomed from the get-go. The language of the LSEA especially coupled with Edwards v Aquillard does not allow for the teaching of either creation or ID. In a nutshell, your objection concerning Nevers’ motives is irrelevant to the point.
Therefore to allege that this bill allows for the teaching of creationism and to characterize the repealing of the LSEA as a repealing of creationism is hubris. What are you fighting against then? Oh, for the uncritical acceptance of microbes-to-man evolution. Yet the scientific method is built of skeptical inquiry and critical analysis from which no theory or model is supposed to be exempt. It is this aspect of the scientific method that has allowed us to progress from Newtonian physics to Einsteinian physics, and from geocentrism to heliocentrism. You’re being a puppet in the hands of those who want to enforce an evolutionary dogma and illegitimately protect it from criticism. This insulation of a favored model is unscientific and, if the Galileo affair has taught us anything at all, ill advised. By repealing the LSEA, you will give the rest of the country the impression that some models and theories should be insulated from the self-correcting mechanisms of scientific inquiry and you will thus do true science a great disservice.
Please come to your senses, sir.
Regards,
Rev Tony Breeden
Founder, CreationLetter.com & CreationSundays.com
science louisiana education evolution teaching
for its contents. This is a safe-cache copy of the original web site.