Could UC policy preclude ID in private schools?

_{DouglasD

February 9, 2006

Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

The University of California is being litigated against by the Association of Christian Schools and Calvary Chapel Christian School of Murrieta, CA for religious discrimination. See here and here.

Given the confusion over the scientific status of ID and it’s incorrect conflation with creationism, how do you think this upcoming judgment might effect the teaching of ID (or not) in high schools? Is it acceptable that the force of law prohibits private schools from teaching their beliefs in addition to those driven by secular standards lest their graduating students be rejected by public universities?

Comments

From the article: "So which is it: upholding standards or religious discrimination?" All the university has to do to win this case is to show that it has published a set of objective standards, that the standards do not discriminate on the basis of race, gender, religious preference, etc., and then show that the Christian school's course materials fail to meet the standards. Has the university published a set of standards? Are the standards objective? Do the standards discriminate? --do they specify what may NOT be taught? --do they somehow compell "belief", not just competency, contrary to the school's religious beliefs? If so, then the California school may be guilty of religious discrimination. And the line between education and indoctrination has been smeared. However, if the school's text fails, for example, to identify Charles Darwin, then the school needs to revise their texts to include that information IF THE INFORMATION IS A PART OF UC's OBJECTIVE STANDARDS. The Christian school also should not be prohibited from teaching creationism IN ADDITION to Darwinism. I would like to know what the standards are that the Christian school hasn't met.Red Reader_{February 11, 2006
February
02
Feb
11
11
2006
02:44 PM
2
02
44
PM
PDT}

Intelligent Design demands A God or Gods of incredible intelligence in the beginning even though it demands none at present. I don't see how that can ever be denied. But what do I know? Not much apparently.John Davison_{February 11, 2006
February
02
Feb
11
11
2006
10:37 AM
10
10
37
AM
PDT}

"Christianity is thriving in 21st Century America like never before."

So are the anti-theists. It seems with the push towards apparent individualism comes polarization of viewpoints. You have on one end Darwinism and theistic evolution (essentially the same scientifically), and creationism on the other. That's what makes ID so dangerous an idea. Creationists view it as too much of a compromise, while Darwinists try incessantly to label us as creationists, eventually convincing themselves to the point of disgusting bigotry. The fact that ID can include most religious beliefs and even agnosticism scares the crap out of the staunch atheists.
Right on! -ds jasonng_{February 10, 2006
February
02
Feb
10
10
2006
06:59 PM
6
06
59
PM
PDT}

Another example of the ABC (Anything But Christianity) culture we are heading into.Mats_{February 9, 2006
February
02
Feb
9
09
2006
03:40 PM
3
03
40
PM
PDT}

"If the university can show that the text presents inaccurate or misleading science, then it may have a legitimate basis for not accepting the course." Are they talking about biology texts with faked embryo drawings or bogus moth experiment photos?russ_{February 9, 2006
February
02
Feb
9
09
2006
03:25 PM
3
03
25
PM
PDT}

Good for them! Stop the madness. How much you want to bet these students have a better understanding of science than those who have only been spoon-fed the party line?jacktone_{February 9, 2006
February
02
Feb
9
09
2006
01:59 PM
1
01
59
PM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply