Posted on 04/28/2006 8:06:41 AM PDT by ToryHeartland
Schools Minister Jacqui Smith has stated that the Government is against the teaching of creationism and 'intelligent design' in science lessons in British schools.
The British Humanist Association (BHA) called on her to justify a parliamentary answer she gave on 17 February, which stated that creationism and 'intelligent design' could be taught in school science lessons (see http://tinyurl.com/zpxn6), Ms Smith has responded by saying that she, 'would like to take this opportunity make clear our position on Creationism and Intelligent Design in the National Curriculum'.
In the statement given to the BHA, the minister said that 'Creationism and Intelligent Design are not included in either the present science programme of study or the revised science programme of study to be implemented in September 2006.'
She goes on to say that the only 'controvers[ies]' that could be taught in science lessons are scientific ones, and that 'Creationism cannot be used as an example of a scientific controversy, as it has no empirical evidence to support it and no underpinning scientific principles or explanations.'
In her statement, Ms Smith is equally scathing of 'Intelligent design': 'Intelligent Design is sometimes erroneously advanced as a scientific theory but it has no underpinning scientific principles or explanations supporting it and is not accepted by the international scientific community.'
Humanist campaigners have welcomed the statement, and Andrew Copson, BHA education officer commented, 'It has always seemed ludicrous that a debate should even exist as to whether creation myths should be taught in school science, even in their pseudo-scientific sheepskin of '"intelligent design". Now we can hopefully draw a line under this pretend 'controversy' - pupils in science lessons should be taught science, creationism and intelligent design are not science, they cannot be taught in science classes. Hopefully the public debate will now go back to the subject where faith schools are most out of kilter with the mainstream curriculum - Religious Education.'
Don't know that this needs the "ping-machine;" it updates and corrects a previous thread, as noted in my post #1, above. But I gather Junior is the resident FR evo archivist, and maybe he would like to take note.
I wonder if the creator of we humans sometimes doesn't shake His head, thinking: "I guess the 'intelligent' quotient didn't survive the design process."
Maybe not, as this isn't really an article about a political controversy in the US. Still, it's good to see that reason prevails where you are. This does complement the recent statement opposing creationism by the Archbishop of Canterbury. I'll ping a dozen or so of the evos, not the whole 370 on the list.
Placemarker
Good stuff. Thanks for the ping.
I hope so: we've got a set of regional elections coming up, and the socialists should get a solid thumping in them! I'll let you know!
Heh, is that the Darwin Central elite corps?
I'd ask to be added to your ping list but I always find these threads anyway.
Being a socialist, after a solid century of evidence that socialism is unworkable, idiotic, unproductive, and deadly, is as intellectually bankrupt as being a creationist.
To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what her policy is on the teaching of creationism as a subject in schools; and if she will make a statement.
Minister's answer [Jacqui Smith]:
Neither creationism nor intelligent design is taught as a subject in schools. The national curriculum programme of study for science at key stage 4 covers evolution. It sets out that pupils should be taught "that the fossil record is evidence for evolution" and also "how variation and selection may lead to evolution or extinction". Pupils should however be taught about "how scientific controversies can arise from different ways of interpreting empirical evidence". Also, the biblical view of creation can be taught in RE [Religious Education] lessons, where pupils are taught to consider opposing theories and come to their own, reasoned conclusions. Therefore, although creationism and intelligent design are not part of the national curriculum, they could be covered in these contexts.
Ping for later read.
Poor Tony seems to be having a very bad month.
But that's nothing compared to the bad years he has given the rest of us.
May should be even worse for Labour, starting with the local elections on the 4th. Of course, it probably only hastens the day our Tone stands aside for Gordo--but here's hoping people just won't buy it. Maybe, just maybe, our long socialist winter is about to give way to spring!
Bollox to the Blue Rinse retards getting power again. They are just as useless as the last bunch that went into power. As soon as William is King, he should disolve parliament and we can live as we should do. A United Kingdom once more.
All parties are centrist by nature anyway, and need to be to secure the votes of those sad beggars that actually think voting makes a difference. News flash; it doesn't. One bunch of muppets goes out, another group of sleazy, lying, two-faced pendeho's take their place. Give me a King, a man of Royal blood and I will give Britain my allegiance once more!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.