Texas Bill Outlaws Discrimination Against Creationists In Academia 1251
ndogg writes "There is a Texas bill, HB 2454, proposed by Republican State Rep. Bill Zedler, that will outlaw discrimination against creationists in colleges and universities. More specifically, it says, 'An institution of higher education may not discriminate against or penalize in any manner, especially with regard to employment or academic support, a faculty member or student based on the faculty member's or student's conduct of research relating to the theory of intelligent design or other alternate theories of the origination and development of organisms.'"
Re:Fair enough. (Score:2, Informative)
No, it's not. You wouldn't hire a math teacher who doesn't believe in calculus, would you?
real story (Score:5, Informative)
No problem (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Good idea (Score:5, Informative)
Since you can't possibly prove or disprove it... open end.
Wrong.
Creationism is not falsifiable. Therefore, it cannot be considered a scientific theory. And *that's* the end of it.
Activist hacks vs. Academic freedom (Score:5, Informative)
This story makes me think of David Horowitz and his skewed take on academic freedom. I encourage everyone to read or listen to him debate prof. Peter Steinberger of Reed College in which Steinberger explains precisely why approaches like this go directly against the principles of academic freedom: http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org/news/2210/ReedCollegeSteinbergerDebate082806.htm [studentsfo...reedom.org]
Audio version here: http://www.reed.edu/reed_magazine/winter06/columns/noc/steinberger.html [reed.edu]
Re:Good idea (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, evolution is not a theory.. It is just still called "theory of evolution" to appease all of the religitards
It is a Theory. The important thing is that a scientific theory, which is a combination of confirmed facts with reasoned and supported generalizations, is completely different from what a layperson thinks of when he hears the word "theory."
Gravity is "just a theory"; it's still stupid to believe that you can jump off a forty-foot ledge and fly by flapping your wings.
Re:Secession (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Not really ridiculous (Score:5, Informative)
The ark was actually found on top a mountain, albeit broken in half.
No it wasn't.
We know that the Mediterranean basin cracked open and flooded the desert a while back, in the area where all that shit happened.
No it didn't.
You may want to argue on the basis of facts, not a half-remembered mishmash of sensationalist stories. Of course, if you're a creationist, you can't do that and still hold on to your beliefs, so never mind.
Re:Not really ridiculous (Score:2, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_deluge_theory
This was on the History Channel.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/04/100428-noahs-ark-found-in-turkey-science-religion-culture/ [nationalgeographic.com]
Big ass boats are found in places they don't belong all the time. The one I was referring to was in 2002 or so, also on the History Channel.
The point is we're not discussing a "global" flood in the first place; think about it for a minute, why would that happen?
Re:Fair enough. (Score:5, Informative)
So would you not hire Einstein because he said, "God does not play dice with the universe"
That's called quote mining, and is a quick sign that the rest of your post is pointless stupidity. Einstein had a tendency to use poetic statements to attempt to illustrate principles he was trying to communicate.
He also said:
About God, I cannot accept any concept based on the authority of the Church. As long as I can remember, I have resented mass indocrination. I do not believe in the fear of life, in the fear of death, in blind faith. I cannot prove to you that there is no personal God, but if I were to speak of him, I would be a liar. I do not believe in the God of theology who rewards good and punishes evil. My God created laws that take care of that. His universe is not ruled by wishful thinking, but by immutable laws.
That sounds pretty much like he falls into the category of "not a creationist", no matter how much you quote-mine and misrepresent things. The same applies to the rest, so yes, you are a dumbass, but it's mostly because you use either poorly researched or deliberately misleading statements to attempt to prop up a failed point.
Re:Fair enough. (Score:2, Informative)
Quit repeating this stupid, sarcastic non-argument! God =/= young-earth creationism. Your poor logic is insidious.
Re:yes but... (Score:4, Informative)
they are doing this to combat the abuses that Ben Stine discusses in his documentary, "Expelled".
The abuses were all Ben Stine's [expelledexposed.com]. All the horror stories of brave creationists standing up to a massive, evil, illogical conspiracy to preach evolution, who got fired as a result were actually all people whose careers were dead-ending for unrelated reasons. After all, it's less damaging to the ego to claim you were a victim rather than incompetent. I suppose the two might not be completely unrelated: if you're so dumb as to ignore all the evidence for evolution in favor of a simpleton's interpretation of your holy book, you probably aren't a very good scientist...
Anyway, the movie should have been called "Excused" rather than "Expelled" and if the great state of texas wanted to combat abuses related to that movie, they should be investigating Ben Stine for lying.
Re:yes but... (Score:4, Informative)
I haven't watched "Expelled", but I've heard that all the "discrimination" presented in the documentary had much simpler explanations, most if not all of the subjects failed to perform their regular duties and were terminated for both failure to perform the duties of the jobs and failure to improve on that performance after receiving several warnings.
For example, I remember, from when I looked into shortly after it was released, that one of the subjects claimed he was fired for writing a book about creationism, which was partially true. He was fired for writing a book about creationism during work hours when he was supposed to conducting unrelated research. Essentially he spent two years committing "time theft" and was completely surprised when he was fired for not doing his job.
Sadly, that documentary suffered from a severe confirmation bias and a persecution complex.