ID coming to Australian schools?

[narcissist]

(I wasn't sure if I should put this in Science or News forum.)

 

'Intelligent design' an option: Nelson

By David Wroe

Canberra

August 11, 2005

 

The Education Minister throws open debate on a thorny theory in schools.

 

The controversial theory of "intelligent design" has won the qualified backing of Education Minister Brendan Nelson, who says it should be taught in schools alongside evolution if that is the wish of parents.

 

Intelligent design, which is damned by critics as a front for biblical Creationism, argues that life on Earth is too complex to have evolved purely through Darwin's theory of natural selection. Dr Nelson said yesterday he had met Campus Crusade for Christ, the Australian advocates of intelligent design, or ID, and watched their DVD presentation, called Unlocking the Mystery of Life.

 

He told the National Press Club in Canberra yesterday that he would oppose replacing evolution with ID in Australia's science classes but said parents should be able to choose that their children learn about it.

 

"Do I think it should be a replacement for teaching the origins of mankind in a scientific sense? I most certainly don't think that it should be at all. In fact, I'd be quite concerned if it were to replace it," said Dr Nelson, who is a medical doctor and a Christian.

 

"Do I think that parents and schools should have the opportunity — if they wish to — for students also to be exposed to this and to be taught about it? Yes I think that's fine," he said. "As far as I'm concerned, students can be taught and should be taught the basic science in terms of the evolution of man, but if schools also want to present students with intelligent design, I don't have any difficulty with that. It's about choice, reasonable choice."

 

US President George Bush made global headlines last week when he endorsed ID. He said both ID and evolution should be taught "so people can understand what the debate is about". The ID debate has raged in the US for more than a decade. One critic has derided ID as "creationism in a cheap tuxedo".

 

Bill Hodgson, head of Campus Crusade for Christ Australia, welcomed Dr Nelson's remarks as "fantastic", adding: "I think any reasonable and balanced approach to education has to take that view.

 

"This is not advocating the teaching of religion."

 

He said his group had never advocated the removal of the theory of evolution from school curriculums and said intelligent design was hard science, not creationism. "There is evidence of intelligent design. All we're saying is that the cutting edge of science is adhering increasingly to intelligent design."

 

The Age reported on Saturday that Mr Hodgson's group was seeking support from educationists, churches, politicians and scientists to distribute its DVD to every Australian high school for inclusion in the curriculum.

 

The Age also asked Health Minister Tony Abbott, known for his Catholic views, his view of intelligent design but he refused to say whether it should be taught in Australian classrooms. "This is a traditional argument which is put forward in theological classes but I'm not a theologian," he said.

 

Labor education spokeswoman Jenny Macklin said: "All young people should have an understanding of a range of religious beliefs."

 

In his speech, Dr Nelson also raised the possibility of having science teachers alternating between teaching at schools and teaching at universities.

source

 

Perhaps not quite as bad as certain parts of the US. Yet.

[dead_hobbit]

He seems pretty reasonable on this. Note that he says that it should only be taught IF the parents want them to learn about it.

 

Now, if they try teaching it even if the parent's express opposition to that theory, then I'd open a can of wupazz on the ID activists...

[Guest Winchester Slate]

IT'S.NOT.SCIENCE!

 

It shouldn't be taught as such!

[Skankboy]

The Age also asked Health Minister Tony Abbott, known for his Catholic views, his view of intelligent design but he refused to say whether it should be taught in Australian classrooms. "This is a traditional argument which is put forward in theological classes but I'm not a theologian," he said.

 

'Nuff said. If they want to teach it in schools, they certainly can, as philosophy and/or theology. To my knowledge, it does not fit the criteria for science and should not be taught in such a setting that would imply it is on equal footing w/evolutionary theory.

 

IMOHO,

[I Broke Free]

Why do Christians have to force disciplines outside of their faith to conform with their beliefs?

 

Science is defined by the scientific method. It is a tool devised to look for NATUAL explanations. There is no malice towards the supernatural; it is just not part of science.

 

The same thing goes for ethics and morality. Ethical and moral conclusions have no responsibility to line up with the concept of sin.

[waynus]

This guy is a moron. Every time he speaks he puts his foot in his mouth. As an Australian teacher I can tell you that this guy is a joke. He has no credibility with educators or the public. What he is doing is trying to raise his public profile within his political party. His minders have for some weeks been desperatly trying to stop his off the cuff remarks to the press, so he appears less ignorant, it hasn't worked yet

[nirrti]

If the parents wish for it? What I want to know is how are they going to decide whether the parents want ID or evolution. Are they going to take a vote in individual school districts? Will the schools where Christian parents are the minority yet speak the loudest have ID forced on them? No other religion gets the same privilege of having their concepts taught in public schools so why is Christianity treated any differently if there's supposedly separation of church and state (or is there such a thing in Australia's constitution)?

 

There are parents who teach their children that other races are inferior, women belong in the home and should be obedient, or people from other religions are evil so will the schools start teaching that under the guise of "what the parents what"? It's one thing to teach children what their parents want them to hear, another to teach the truth, though it may be unpopular.

[Mr. Neil]

If the parents wish? This is a fallacy used in the US by creationists. Parents have absolutely no right to dictate what is taught in public schools.

 

I'm willing to give Christian parents some slack that they're probably not being dishonest when they question evolution. They're just the victims of the dishonesty dealt to them by ICR, AIG, and CSE. Their intentions are most likely quite genuine. However, having good intentions doesn't make them right, and they deserve to have it explained to them that what the want taught to their children is wrong.

 

The job of the educator is to teach the student the best available information about what is true; not the cater to the whims and sensativities of parents.

[waynus]

If the parents wish for it?  What I want to know is how are they going to decide whether the parents want ID or evolution.  Are they going to take a vote in individual school districts?  so why is Christianity treated any differently if there's supposedly separation of church and state (or is there such a thing in Australia's constitution)?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

We don't have school districts, each state goverment decides what is taught.

 

We don't have seperation of church and state.

 

Yes we have a constitution but it's got nothing to do with human rights or individual rights. It's mainly about the political process.