Hm. On the one hand I support this. On the other hand, what happens if in 2018 President Palin decides to change the standards?

DamnYankees: Hm. On the one hand I support this. On the other hand, what happens if in 2018 President Palin decides to change the standards?

Exactly. That is frightening. But so are local school boards. Isn't there any control at the state level?

HakunaMatata: DamnYankees: Hm. On the one hand I support this. On the other hand, what happens if in 2018 President Palin decides to change the standards?

Exactly. That is frightening. But so are local school boards. Isn't there any control at the state level?

Most states have statewide standards. That doesn't prevent statewide stupidity, though (see Kansas, Texas, etc.).

I still support the teaching of creationism (in lieu of science) wherever there are people who want it. Let the problem solve itself.

What the hell? How does a president have this power? Even if it might be good for Kansas.

HakunaMatata: But so are local school boards. Isn't there any control at the state level?

Yes. Only they don't get Federal $$$ if they tell the Fed "no". Same thing with roads and highways. The states are generally welcome to manage their own affairs but to get Federal $$, they have to dance for it. I think people actually believe Federal money is free, it's not.

RobertBruce: What the hell? How does a president have this power? Even if it might be good for Kansas.

Department of Education ... federal spending. You teach Creationism, we withhold federal funding. That's my guess. The Spending Clause is ultimate power where the federal government doesn't otherwise have the power to legislate something.

Mordant: I still support the teaching of creationism (in lieu of science) wherever there are people who want it. Let the problem solve itself.

The problem is that Creationists seem to view one solution to their problems as "crank out as many kids as possible," which means they'll have numerical superiority long before I've acquired nuclear weapons and the authority to force sterilizations.

and without science they'll crank out kids with lifespans equivalent to those of the past. It may take a couple of tries, but clearly this attempt at mankind advancing has been kind of a failure. Eventually it'll work or we'll become extinct, either way is fine.

Didn't we already have one President attempt to apply standards to schools across the nation? I don't seem to remember people thinking his idea was such a grand thing.

Mordant: I still support the teaching of creationism (in lieu of science) wherever there are people who want it. Let the problem solve itself.

The people who want it already get it in church. Why they also need it taught in schools is what I find irritating.

DamnYankees: Hm. On the one hand I support this. On the other hand, what happens if in 2018 President Palin decides to change the standards?

That was my first thought too. Politicians don't seem to think long term.

They need to stop trying to federalize everything. All you accomplish is add another layer of bureaucracy and end up pissing everyone off.

Wouldn't this violate the Constitution? Would this not require a Constitutional Amendment?

Tr0mBoNe: Wouldn't this violate the Constitution? Would this not require a Constitutional Amendment?

No and no.

I don't think the President has that power, He'll get laughed at all the way to court.

Mordant: and without science they'll crank out kids with lifespans equivalent to those of the past. It may take a couple of tries, but clearly this attempt at mankind advancing has been kind of a failure. Eventually it'll work or we'll become extinct, either way is fine.

Unfortunately they crank out little fundie demons who still benefit from science while denigrating it. If they lived without technological improvements as some sort of neo-Amish thing I wouldn't care so much.

What about all the federal funds handed out now for teaching abstinence-only "sex-ed?"

I hope that crap is going to disappear too.

Well, I dunno. Thing is, half the countries that Americans idolize for having all this advanced education, "just the facts basics!" and high-performing students, etc all have nationalized curricula (and flat equal funding of schools, though that'd be another thread).

borg: I don't think the President has that power, He'll get laughed at all the way to court.

Well, of course he does, to the same extent the feds have the power to force every state to raise its drinking age to 21 or (for a time) mandate a 55 mph speed limit--it's the old "do this or we cut off federal funding" thing. That doesn't mean it's a good idea, of course, for reasons others have pointed out above.

ToxicMunkee: The people who want it already get it in church. Why they also need it taught in schools is what I find irritating.

It's not so much that they need it taught in schools, it's that they don't want their kids being spoiled by hearing the ALTERNATIVE (i.e. reality) in schools, because they know, deep down in the repressed parts of their brains, that the real story is more compelling. If the kids hear about evolution, they will realize that creationism just doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

If there were no science at all in schools (note: Amish schools pretty much neglect it) then they'd probably be ok with that.

It's not just evolution, either - you look deeply into many scientific fields, and at the very least you end up with timescales that are longer than the Biblically calculated supposed age of the earth.

Hence, serious religious schools tend to avoid teh science (if they do secular education at all - many don't).

Obama might institute a set of national science standards, removing the ability of local school boards to choose to teach creationism, and WTF, take all your guns too...

And he might molest Micheal Jackson's kids...

And he might nuke Russia...

And he might tax ammunition 500%...

And he might raise taxes on everybody...

And he might be the anti-Christ....

And he might be a secret Jewish Muslim terrorist....

borg: I don't think the President has that power

While IAmNotALawyer, I believe you are correct. Article I, Section 8 reserves to Congress to "fix the standard of weights and measures", and Title 20 does not appear to have delegated it. Thus, he ought to go to Congress to request statutory authority.

Of course, a case could be made for considering this a "national security" matter, such as Dubya used to ignore the FISA restrictions. I'm sure some budding law student could have fun trying to draft a brief to that effect. =)

DamnYankees: Hm. On the one hand I support this. On the other hand, what happens if in 2018 President Palin decides to change the standards?

Downside of Federalism: you put all your eggs in one basket. As a precaution, the standards should doubtless be expressed as minimum expectations. Some means to challenge the (scientific) accuracy of standards might also be worth including.

CanisNoir: Didn't we already have one President attempt to apply standards to schools across the nation? I don't seem to remember people thinking his idea was such a grand thing.

To paraphrase my niece (currently enduring the effects), it wasn't that the idea that was bad, but that the implementation was wretched (compared to anything save the handling of Iraq).

Considering that we've been behind in science and mathematics for years, maybe this will be a good thing.

Also, creationism != science

Mordant: Let the problem solve itself.

In the long term, such "solution" is as inexorable as the Second Law of Thermodynamics. However, it would be advantageous (from an evolutionary standpoint) if we could find a solution more efficient than consigning a largish chunk of our society to the dumpster of history.

kmmontandon: they'll have numerical superiority long before I've acquired nuclear weapons and the authority to force sterilizations

Biological weapons are cheaper, easier, and potentially more precise for achieving this objective. Check Ebay for supplies.

Creationism is for religious class.


/we are all just ants

Pay attention, kids. Kansas is back to teaching evolution only.

I would guess that Change.org is simply a useless website. Evidently, teaching Esperanto in school has gotten more votes. Can this get any sillier? If you want to teach a useless language, teach Quenya or Sindarin--at least it's pretty and might be as valuable as Navaho in the Army. Hmm. Not a bad idea, actually.

I don't see how setting a Science curriculum would affect teaching Creationism, since Creationism isn't Science. Offer a course on Comparative Religion (yeah, right) and teach all the Creationism you want.

abb3w: However, it would be advantageous (from an evolutionary standpoint) if we could find a solution more efficient than consigning a largish chunk of our society to the dumpster of history.

well, I guess it would still be embarrassing if the aliens came and saw what was in that dumpster, though not nearly as bad as having to try to assure them that some of the people didn't fervently believe in fairy tales.

Yeah, this "story" is a no-go.
It's a link to a blog post that links to a useless social networking site that's not actually affiliated with Obama.
Somebody on that site proposed the standards idea.
If it makes the top 10, it'll be presented on inauguration day.
Obama will likely glance at the list and put it safely away in the circular filing receptacle.

Shame on the Modmins for greenlighting it.

It's time for this country to be dragged into the 21st century, by force if necessary.

If you want your children to learn Creationism, that's what church is for.

Exodus2001: And he might molest Micheal Jackson's kids...

He'd better, that's the whole reason I voted for him.

What's sad is that things have gotten so bad that this would even need to be a consideration.

I'm not antichurch/god/whatever but its getting to the point where we need to do what we always say islam needs to do.

When a wacko does something everyone needs to scream out "where are the moderate voices in the church on this? Why are they not standing up to this?"

When you're dicking around with the science classes based on your own beliefs you're taking away the rights of others and dicking around with the nations future. And some groups need to be called on the carpet for that.

And I'm not sold on a national standard. But I like that idea better than 5 hicks blatently ignoring the constitution because their pastor said they should.

Subby, stop this stupidity. You know full well he's not going to do that.

angryjd: Subby, stop this stupidity. You know full well he's not going to do that.

A guy can dream, right? That in the year 2008, soon to be 2009, that the Federal Gov't might recognize the importance of scientific literacy in the National Economy?

/Not subby

DamnYankees: Hm. On the one hand I support this. On the other hand, what happens if in 2018 President Palin decides to change the standards?

Michael Palin is British. He can't be elected president. There are no other famouns Palins qualified to run a dog pound, let alone a country.

Mordant: well, I guess it would still be embarrassing if the aliens came and saw what was in that dumpster

No, no... that's not the problem. What I'm suggesting is that an "evolved" society ought to be able to find some way to make efficient use of such scum, rather than dumpstering the lot. Sorta like that sludge left over from refining oil that now gets made into plastic?

DamnYankees: Hm. On the one hand I support this. On the other hand, what happens if in 2018 President Palin decides to change the standards?

I think you mean 2013.

abb3w: What I'm suggesting is that an "evolved" society ought to be able to find some way to make efficient use of such scum, rather than dumpstering the lot.

Hey, we've all seen that movie with Charlton Heston...

right ends, wrong means

on the other hand, does change.org actually have anything to do with Obama?

Wow this thread turned into a whole lot of Evolutionist smug rather quickly.

OMG someone wants a debate in school?!?!? Quick - Someone tell them how stoopid they are.

/Wait - who's the one afraid of having their bliefs chanllenged in a schoolastic setting? Oh, right, those who believe in Evolution.

CanisNoir: Wow this thread turned into a whole lot of Evolutionist smug rather quickly.

OMG someone wants a debate in school?!?!? Quick - Someone tell them how stoopid they are.

/Wait - who's the one afraid of having their bliefs chanllenged in a schoolastic setting? Oh, right, those who believe in Evolution.

Not even you are this stupid. Though you are certainly this disingenuous and intellectually dishonest.

CanisNoir: Wow this thread turned into a whole lot of Evolutionist smug rather quickly.

OMG someone wants a debate in school?!?!? Quick - Someone tell them how stoopid they are.

/Wait - who's the one afraid of having their bliefs chanllenged in a schoolastic setting? Oh, right, those who believe in Evolution.

Not the point and most rational people understand that.

log_jammin: When a wacko does something everyone needs to scream out "where are the moderate voices in the church on this? Why are they not standing up to this?"

Creationism is an evangelical Protestant thing. Catholics, Anglicans and other liberal Christian faiths teach evolution. The church you're referring to is Church of Christ and Southern Baptists, who exist in large numbers in the America's Stupid Zone.

As much as everyone hates immigrants, they are much less likely to be fundamentalists. Hate wisely.

So if a bunch of people believe that water falls upward, rather than downward....should we humor them and teach that gravity is a fallacy along with the fact that gravity is in fact, a fact? No, we would not.


So why are we humoring these people?

Coco LaFemme: So if a bunch of people believe that water falls upward, rather than downward....should we humor them and teach that gravity is a fallacy along with the fact that gravity is in fact, a fact? No, we would not.


So why are we humoring these people?

Intelligent Falling FTW!!1!

I'm thinking down the line this will be one of those benevolent precedent-setters that ends up getting abused.

CanisNoir: Wow this thread turned into a whole lot of Evolutionist smug rather quickly.

OMG someone wants a debate in school?!?!? Quick - Someone tell them how stoopid they are.

/Wait - who's the one afraid of having their bliefs chanllenged in a schoolastic setting? Oh, right, those who believe in Evolution.

Evolution is science, not a belief. We teach science in science class, period. Creationism isn't a scientific theory and isn't a "challenge" to evolution in any arena other than that of public opinion so what's your point?

I don't expect them to teach bullshiat like Lysenkoism in science classes either, at least not as anything other than an example of politics hijacking science and doing it wrong.

borg: I don't think the President has that power, He'll get laughed at all the way to court.

Congress makes the laws, the Judiciary interprets the laws, the Executive enforces the laws