Once again I’m left wondering why I’m accused of moral relativism March 9, 2008
Posted by Evil Bender in Science, education, wingnuts.trackback
The Oklahoma House of Representatives Education Committee has just approved House Bill 2211. The bill is expected to pass the full House, and then to go to the Senate. Its authors describe it as promoting freedom of religion in the public schools. In fact, it does the opposite. [...]
The bill requires public schools to guarantee students the right to express their religious viewpoints in a public forum, in class, in homework and in other ways without being penalized. If a student’s religious beliefs were in conflict with scientific theory, and the student chose to express those beliefs rather than explain the theory in response to an exam question, the student’s incorrect response would be deemed satisfactory, according to this bill.
The school would be required to reward the student with a good grade, or be considered in violation of the law. Even simple, factual information such as the age of the earth (4.65 billion years) would be subject to the student’s belief, and if the student answered 6,000 years based on his or her religious belief, the school would have to credit it as correct. Science education becomes absurd under such a situation.
That’s right, folks, the Religious Right, self-appointed champions of Truth against the tide of evil liberal relativism, are pushing for a bill that would require schools to reward students for positing religious answers to any “otherwise permissible subject” (rtf of the bill is available here).
I should think it obvious that such a law would be incredibly destructive to real education, as facts are forced to become subservient to unsupported religious beliefs. If for some of my readers, it’s not immediately clear why a student should not be allowed to claim that A Magic Man Done It is an acceptable answer to scientific questions, consider answers provided by any religion but the one you happen to support:
Question: What causes lightning?
Answer: Thor.
Surely that deserves full credit, right?
Naturally this problem isn’t limited to science, either. There are all kinds of crazy religious views on history, for example. Should Mormon students be given credit for factually incorrect versions of American history that have Native Americans being descendants of the Jews? Should Christian students be given credit for arguing that America was founded by God to be a “City on a Hill,” when asked to describe the country’s founding?
It never ceases to amaze me how us “evil secular progressives” are blamed for trying to ruin students education, when there are those on the extreme right who are actively arguing that students should be rewarded for giving incorrect answers, as long as they can argue their ignorance isn’t simple lack of understanding but instead is based on their religious views?
Somehow that’s what we’ve come to: proposed laws that enshrine religiously-motivated ignorance as knowledge.
Disgusting.
[h/t ERV]
[...] to say Published March 9, 2008 religious right , ridiculous This is literally the most absurd thing I’ve ever heard of: The Oklahoma House of Representatives Education Committee has just approved House Bill 2211. The [...]
Did you go read the text of the bill? I think it has been misinterpreted.
“Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of the submission by the student. Homework and classroom work shall be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance and against other legitimate pedagogical concerns identified by the school. Students shall not be penalized or rewarded on account of religious content. If the assignment given by a teacher involves writing a poem, the work of a student who submits a poem in the form of a prayer (for example, a psalm) should be judged on the basis of academic standards, including literary quality, and not penalized or rewarded on account of its religious content.”
http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2007-08HB/HB2211_int.rtf
So it looks like a kid can write, “I think the earth is 6,000 years old” on a test as long as he also writes “but we learned in class it is 4.65 billion years old”. Given we already have the 1st amendment I don’t see what the necessity for this addition is.
The bill also tries to clear the way for student speakers to mention their religious convictions, if any, at certain events without their viewpoints being construed as establishment of religion. Again, not sure if this is needed, perhaps it clarifies existing law? At this point this bill looks mostly irrelevant, and only possibly a bad idea. We need more information.
Primary sources always trump secondary ones.
Dear Ms Bender,
I may be a little off, but I will still hazard a guess that the purpose of the bill, at least as far as quoted above by Nimravid, was to protect a threatened minority, that is, students of a religious persuasion, and aimed at people who reason the same way you do in your original note. Cheers.
Nimravid: I disagree. The bill is very vaguely worded, and at very least could potentially interpreted to allow students to hide ignorance behind an inappropriate “my religion says it” cloak, which would undermine the very concept of education.
kenmueller: I’m amused by your claim that being religious makes someone a member of a minority. Students don’t need their religious views protected. That’s already in the constitution. They need to be free to learn at school, and to not have their education undercut by others’ religious beliefs.
How do you figure that? The bill says assignments should be graded based on “ordinary academic standards”.
Because a student can conceivably claim that its “discrimination based on the religious content of the submission by the student” to require them to answer a science question with actual science, rather than with their unsupported religious views.
If that’s not the intent of the bill’s sponsors, surely they could rewrite it to make that clear. Somehow I doubt they will.
Catering to their religious prejudices on a topic like that would be abandoning ordinary academic standards and rewarding religious content, both of which the bill says aren’t supposed to be done.
Don’t get me wrong, I think the bill is redundant and the product of religious people who feel “discriminated against” in the absence of actual violations of 1st amendment rights, but I don’t think it will pass and if it does doubt it will make any substantial difference in current practice at all.