Fish, Grand Lake (4/17/2008 6:14:37 AM)

Darwin's theory is just that, a theory. The theory is full of contradictions, wrong conclusions, and certailnly is not science. Students should study this ridilculous theory and be graded on their understanding of how wrong Darwin was. Every human being was created by God and their religious belief is relevant.

a, tulsa (4/17/2008 7:03:58 AM)

And I feel believe exactly the opposite, Fish...there is no god, when are going to grow up and move on already??

This is yet another attempt to bring religion into the schools, particularly conservative Christianity. I really don't understand why people want this, because believe me, if you let one in you let all of them in, including my atheism. Is that really what you want?

what, tulsa (4/17/2008 7:35:14 AM)

We have already kicked God from the schools.
Athiesm is a religion so we cant have that,
Lets just keep drugs,and violence in our schools
and maybe a gay pride organization or two.
Public schools systems in Okla and nation wide are just
training camps for future state and federal prison convicts anyway.

kg, Bartlesville (4/17/2008 8:51:33 AM)

This is another stealth attempt to inject so called intelligent design into the schools. That is a religious tenet not a scientific one.
The National Academy of Sciences had published a book on the subject -totally debunking ID as science. It is free on their Web-site after registration.
The test of a good scientific theory is its predictive value. The theory of evolution has a very very high predictive value. ID by comparison has none - God willed it so stuff happens poof - LOL.

Anybody who talks about "just theory:" is clearly scientifically illiterate. All science is "just theory" in in the sense that all is continually open to challenge and refining. There are no scientific laws - although things are mistakenly called that. The "law" of gravity stood for 100s of years until Einstein found that at the extremes of high speed and mass that Newton was wrong.
I shudder to think what kind of students we would generate if they went out of school with ID in their minds - Bio-science is the big thing in 21st century science - and I promise that nobody in the business would hire students from an ID school.
Leave your ID in the church where it belongs.

UFO'S, BARTLESVILLE (4/17/2008 10:04:53 AM)

4. 4/17/2008 8:51:33 AM, kg, Bartlesville
This is another stealth attempt to inject so called intelligent design into the schools. That is a religious tenet not a scientific one.
The National Academy of Sciences had published a book on the subject -totally debunking ID as science. It is free on their Web-site after registration.
The test of a good scientific theory is its predictive value. The theory of evolution has a very very high predictive value. ID by comparison has none - God willed it so stuff happens poof - LOL.

Anybody who talks about "just theory:" is clearly scientifically illiterate. All science is "just theory" in in the sense that all is continually open to challenge and refining. There are no scientific laws - although things are mistakenly called that. The "law" of gravity stood for 100s of years until Einstein found that at the extremes of high speed and mass that Newton was wrong.
I shudder to think what kind of students we would generate if they went out of school with ID in their minds - Bio-science is the big thing in 21st century science - and I promise that nobody in the business would hire students from an ID school.
Leave your ID in the church where it belongs.
////
Those scientist ARE and will be hired from China,India,Russia
NOT BARTELSVILLE. so,DO YOUR DUTY AS A GOOD HILLBILLY SCIENTIST and go keep you eye peeled for flying saucers

Ezri, (4/17/2008 10:23:01 AM)

Wow... I'm a little frightened by some of these comments.
Remember guys, if you let Christianity back into the classroom, you have to let ALL RELIGION in as well. That means paganism, Satanism, and all those other "scary" religions.
That's why this probably won't go into effect... Parents are terrified that their children may be exposed to other religions. What a crime THAT would be. Next thing you know, kids might start thinking for themselves.

Joe-Allen Doty, Tulsa, OK (4/17/2008 10:52:17 AM)

Back in the early 20th Century when local school systems were taken out of the local churches and were supported by taxes, the local churches and church denominations lost their authority over the schools.
--
They did not take God out of the schools; they took the schools out of "God's buildings."
--
The Walnut Grove Church in Walnut Grove, MN, in the "Little House on the Prairie" TV series was where the children went to school. The Church Board and the School Board were the same people and the pastor was the same as the teacher's principal. He had authority over the teacher in HIS school.
--
I studied the history of Education in the USA when I took the "Introduction to Education" course for teachers at Northeastern State College in Tahlequah in the Spring of 1963.

Joe-Allen Doty, Tulsa, OK (4/17/2008 11:10:29 AM)

I have discovered that most of the "Christian" parents who want prayer, Bible reading and Christian education in public schools do not pray with or study the Bible with their children at home.
--
Those parents expect teachers who cannot be Oklahoma State Department of Education certified to teach religious education in public schools to teach their children to be "Christian."
--
Charles Darwin never claimed that his "Theory of Evolution" was actual scientific fact. And in spite of what the atheistic Darwinists believe, Darwin was NEVER an atheist.
--
If Darwin had never even created that theory, real biological science teachers would start with one celled animals and one celled plants and progress up to the most complex plant an animal organisms without even having to claim the existence of an evolution al theory.
--
According to what is written in Genesis chapter One, plants and animals appear in the very same sequence as in the theory of evolution.
--
But, in Genesis 2, before plants and animals are created, LORD God creates a single human being (the Hebrew word for human is "adam"). The plants are created as well as the garden in Eden where the adam is place to take care of the plants.
--
Next, animals are created. When LORD God (Hebrew word for "God" is plural in the Hebrew Scriptures) decided the adam was lonely and THEY would create a "help meet" for the adam, the word for "help" is "ezer" which means a "masculine" helper or "mate." A female "help" or "mate" in Hebrew is "ezeroth."
--
"Neged" the Hebrew word translated as "meet" does not mean "mate." It means "comparable to" or identical to."
--
I won't go into the complete word study of why I believe that the first two human beings were identical and double-gendered here; but, in Genesis 2, nothing was written telling the two original "adam" persons to procreate. Oh, the plural of "adam" is still "adam." It is a collective noun in Hebrew.

kg, bartlesville (4/17/2008 11:29:02 AM)

I believe in the Great Spaghetti Monster myself and if this were passed would expect full representation in every classroom.
I would also expect a monument to rigatoni on every courthouse lawn and my best sauce recipe on every classroom wall.
If you study ID or sauce yes the Chinese will get your job. My kid will have no such problem I assure you - although she is a good cook.

EXCELLENT, TULSA (4/17/2008 11:42:06 AM)

9. 4/17/2008 11:29:02 AM, kg, bartlesville
I believe in the Great Spaghetti Monster myself and if this were passed would expect full representation in every classroom.
I would also expect a monument to rigatoni on every courthouse lawn and my best sauce recipe on every classroom wall.
If you study ID or sauce yes the Chinese will get your job. My kid will have no such problem I assure you - although she is a good cook.
////
GOOD FOR HER
I LIKE TO SEE CHILDREN FROM OKLA. MAKE GOOD.
AS YOU KNOW being a father
that is not and easy task.

ChristopherBlackwell, Deming, NM (4/17/2008 3:47:28 PM)

Oh I look forward to the first Wiccan child talking about her religion in class. Of course the first Muslim kid will be interesting, as will the first Voodoo child. The discussions about Hoodoo magic should prove interesting as well. Then the discussion of all the things you see with consumption different local plants.

Kids will hear about so many interesting religions so different from their own. Who knows how that might change the way they look at their religion? Just think of the interesting questions they will have for their parents and their minister. Like when one should use a chicken, and when one should use a goat, for sacrifice?

John, Broken Arrow (4/17/2008 4:14:43 PM)

Why even talk about Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. That was mid 1800 work, that was not so much a theory as it was an observation that natural selection appeared to have an influence on life. Today’s evolutionary theories differ radically from what Darwin thought he was observing. It is like referring to the Tang dynasty’s theory of rocket propulsion. They invented gunpowder and used it to make rockets, but none of their theories applies to today’s rockets. Darwin got scientists thinking, but it took hundreds of scientists since then to refine a theory.

Tommy West, (4/17/2008 6:21:58 PM)

I am somewhat put off by Mr. Ballard's comment about no one wanting a Pagan workshop. Clearly he has never meet a Pagan and doesn't realize that a Pagan workshop would not consist of the unsavory things that churchs and the media would like people to believe. I wish people would stop buying into the stereotypes of Paganism. The truth is far less exciting and dangerous than people would expect.

Joseph Paulk, Tulsa (4/18/2008 10:29:17 AM)

I missed Ballard's comment about "no one wanting a Pagan workshop." Was it in the above article? I did read, "We open we open ourselves up for bringing in other viewpoints...." God (you should pardon the expression) forbid that that should ever happen in Oklahoma.

Pasta Pirate, (4/22/2008 11:45:47 AM)

Arrr! Great and Noodly! TFSM approves of this bill, finaly the state's houses of education must recognise our saucey devotion regardless of the context in which we place it. The Erisians and the Discordians (incestious foes they be!) surely do a succulent jig with joy as well.

Arrr!

Anon, (4/22/2008 11:50:32 AM)

I've been following stories about this on another site. The legislator and his constituency appear to have expectations based more on wishful thinking than on observable human behaviour.

One quote from this article, an argument from an opponent of the law, is actually incorrect: [quote] Mark Bledsoe, executive director of the United Suburban Schools Association, said one section of Williamson's amendment could force schools to accept student papers and tests that are not responsive.

For example, he said, a student could be asked to explain Darwin's theory of evolution but respond that he or she believes that God created the universe.

"I can't grade your test under that legislation," Bledsoe said. "It creates, in my opinion, additional liability for schools to be sued. It creates a protection for your religious beliefs when they are not relevant." [/quote]

The amendment clearly states "Homework and classroom assignments shall be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance and against other legitimate pedagogical concerns identified by the school district." _ *prior to* _ "Students shall not be penalized or rewarded on account of the religious content of their work." Thus, a teacher can follow the letter of the law while still teaching the subject to high academic standards. The key is to phrase homework assignments and test questions clearly and unambiguously.

So: a question asking students to list the earth's geologic stages and their time frames, as described in the curriculum textbook from the research of X,Y, and Z, and accepted by current mainstream scientific community has only one correct answer. A question asking students what X and Y discovered about evolution regarding [insert species or process] from their work conducted during [insert years] has only one correct answer. Such questions sidestep entirely whether the student "believes" the material -- it ascertains only whether they read it. An answer of belief that the Earth is 6,000 years old and was created by God in six 24-hour days can -- and must -- be marked as incorrect, because it did not answer the question.

A question asking the student to list the major contributing causes to [insert historical event] based on [insert chapter X of textbook X] has only one correct answer. An answer of belief that atheists, [p]agans and communists were deceived by the devil in defiance of God's will can -- and must -- be marked as incorrect because it did not answer the question.

A question asking the student to list the items of the Bill of Rights has only one correct answer. An answer testifying that the US was founded by God on Biblical principals can -- and must -- be marked as incorrect because it did not answer the question.

None of these questions asks the student to describe their own deeply held beliefs. None require the student to *agree* -- in whole or in part -- with any of the information outlined in approved curriculum materials. They *do* require the student to demonstrate that assignments have been done. In other words, that the student learned the material in the approved curriculum and can meet state and federal standards for advancement Learning what has been discovered or done by others does not require agreement with those conclusion or actions. After all, this is public school, not a Bible Study.