Supporting Darwinism Is Protected Free Speech, Voicing Scientific Challenges Is Not
It isn't just profs in SMU's Ivory Tower that are afraid of students learning more about the failings of Darwinian evolution. In New Mexico recently an attempt to ensure academic freedom in line with the state's educational standards has been opposed by local, dogmatic Darwin-only lobbyists. Joe Renick of ID Net New Mexico today has an opinion piece, Fear of Exposure, that shows the intolerance of the Darwinists in regard to any views but their own.
Unhappy with the thought that scientific views different than their own might be discussed in science classes, the Darwinists avoid the science debate entirely (as usual) and accuse the backers of academic freedom of wanting to insert religion into the science curriculum.
The principle objectives of this legislation are to "give teachers the right and freedom, when a theory of biological origins is taught, to objectively inform students of scientific information relevant to the strengths and weaknesses of that theory and protect teachers from reassignment, termination, discipline or other discrimination for doing so," and to give students the "right and freedom to reach their own conclusions about biological origins."We've seen university presidents forbid their science faculty any discussion of intelligent design in their classes. We've seen government scientists harassed, professors lose their jobs and students denied their degrees. More recently we've see, that professors at SMU won't even allow outside events on their campus just to discuss intelligent design.
Thomas warns that while the bill is about academic freedom, its intent is to teach creationism in the science classroom.
Having assisted in the drafting of this legislation, I can say that it says what it means and means what it says - nothing different, nothing more and nothing less.
There is a lawyer's adage that says, "If the facts are on your side, argue the facts. If the law is on your side, argue the law. If neither are on your side, change the subject and go after the motives of your opponent."
Now, when legislation is put forward that would ensure that the free speech rights of scientists and eductors aren't trampled by Darwinist thought police, we see the ugly face of censorship.
Again I ask, what is so dangerous about this discussion going forward?
Joe Renick concludes by offering an answer to that question:
It is academic freedom the Darwinists fear because it will expose the weakness of the evolutionary theory.Oppose the establishment.