So did the nation’s Founders intend the Constitution to treat all Americans equally, regardless of their religion? A court brief recently filed by his Texas-based WallBuilders organization makes it pretty clear that David Barton doesn’t think so.
WallBuilders, which opposes separation of church and state, has filed the brief in a federal appeals court that is considering a religious discrimination case in California. The case involves a Wiccan clergyman the state of California would not hire as a prison chaplain because of his religious beliefs. California law limits the position only to Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Muslims and Native Americans.
Friday’s “Republican Party of Texas Update” e-mail puts party Chair Cathie Adams’ bizarre worries on display once again. The Update notes Adams’ activities while attending the Republican National Committee Winter Meeting. Among them:
“Chairman Adams sponsored a resolution reaffirming the American right to bear arms, in the face of threats eminating from international bodies like the Organization of American States and the United Nations.”
Huh?
So does Adams think the UN or the OAS is trying to take away Americans’ guns? Or is she worried about America’s imminent invasion by the two international organizations?
Well, her fellow Republicans didn’t seem to think her suggestion was weird. The e-mail notes that Adams’ resolution “passed without controversy.”
No one should be surprised by taunting in partisan politics. But are there no limits?
Today’s e-mail from the right-wing, Midland-based lobby group/PAC Empower Texans notes that Democrats Farouk Shami and Bill White will square off on Monday in a gubernatorial debate. “The comedy factor will be high, if for no other reason than both men are likely to lose in November,” writes the group’s president, Michael Quinn Sullivan. (Empower Texans PAC has endorsed Gov. Rick Perry for re-election.) Then this:
“I still think ‘Shami-White’ sounds like a car-care product.”
That’s the headline in a disgusting e-mail blast sent out today by Free Market Foundation the newly renamed Liberty Institute, the Texas affiliate of the far-right organization Focus on the Family. The e-mail criticizes calls from President Obama, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen, and former Secretary of State and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Colin Powell to end the military’s ban on openly gay and lesbian service members. The terribly misnamed “Liberty Institute” calls the proposed repeal an “attack on our military” and “social experimentation.”
Yet as the e-mail makes clear, military leaders themselves have called for repeal. Are those leaders attacking their own military? Really? In addition, polls show that a large majority of Americans also supports repealing the ban. So do most Americans hate the military?
Leave it to far-right pressure groups to viciously attack our nation’s military leaders and other opponents of mindless discrimination against gay and lesbian Americans who want to serve their country in a time of war. That’s because far-right extremists care more about using hate to divide Americans for political gain (and fundraising) than in truly promoting liberty. That’s deeply shameful and a slap in the face of truly patriotic Americans.
Texas State Board of Education members have been beating their chests about an Education Week study that gives the state an “A” in curriculum development. At last month’s state board meeting, for example, they used the study to trash critics who have (correctly) warned about the damage the board’s far-right faction has done the last two years to language arts and science curriculum standards and, this year, to social studies standards. The state’s education commissioner even joined board members in crowing.
Well, the commissioner and board members either didn’t understand what the study really said or they deliberately distorted its findings. As Tony Whitson explains on his always-informative curricublog, the study didn’t look at the substance of the standards themselves. The study simply gave the state high marks for having course- and grade-specific standards as well as supplementary resources for teachers and particular student populations. The actual quality of the standards? You won’t find that analyzed in the study.
Of course, that fact won’t stop the board’s far-right members from dishonestly defending their efforts to politicize our kids’ classrooms and promote fringe agendas in public school curriculum standards. They just don’t let the truth get in their way.
UPDATE: A study last year gave science curriculum standards in Texas an “F” for their treatment of evolution — a concept that forms the foundation for the study of the biological sciences. Read more about the study here.
New finance reports show that fundraising so far for Texas State Board of Education campaigns appears to be significantly higher than in many past elections. But fundraising totals in most races this year are still relatively small considering the size of the sprawling board districts in play.
District 5 (Ken Mercer, incumbent), for example, begins in San Antonio and extends out into the Hill Country, up to southern Travis County and then around the west up to Bell County well to the north of Austin. District 9 (Don McLeroy, incumbent) stretches from north of Dallas to around Bryan/College Station. District 10 (Cynthia Dunbar, not running for re-election) stretches from northern Travis County and Williamson County to west of Houston. Moreover, the population for each of the 15 board districts is also more than twice that for the state’s more numerous Congressional and state Senate districts.
So candidates in these races need a lot of money to get their messages out to voters. San Antonio businessman James Leininger, the religious right’s sugar daddy in Texas, spent heavily in the early and mid-1990s to help elect far-right candidates to the board. But with notable exceptions, state board races typically attract just a few thousand dollars. One such exception: Ken Mercer raised about $50,000 in his successful bid to defeat board incumbent Dan Montgomery in the 2006 Republican Primary. More than half of Mercer’s total came from Leininger.
Leininger hasn’t thrown his wallet into the electoral ring this year, at least not for state board seats. It’s possible that he will do so in the final month of the primary campaign because Mercer and McLeroy — both members of the board’s far-right faction — face stiff challenges in their GOP races. And the November general election will include several board races contested by both major parties.
In the meantime, only a few candidates seem to be drawing significant money — so far. Mercer’s Republican opponent, Tim Tuggey of Austin, leads the pack, reporting contributions of nearly $75,000 since mid-2009, according to reports filed with the Texas Ethics Commission. But Mercer’s fundraising totals less than $10,000 for the same period. Of the Democrats seeking that District 5 seat, Rebecca Bell-Metereau is the fundraising leader: more than $28,000 since mid-2009.
“Forcing soldiers to cohabit with people who view them as sexual objects would inevitably lead to increased sexual tension, sexual harassment, and even sexual assault.”
“If you sit on the mental health commission, do you have to be retarded? If you sit on the [Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission], do you have to be a drunk?”
Bradley was arguing that the board — made up mostly of non-finance types, like a dentist, lawyers, an insurance salesman and political activists — could do a fine job of managing the massive PSF. But perhaps more interesting was Bradley’s sneering criticism of the fund’s permanent professional staff. He told the Tribune that the staff simply couldn’t be trusted because those employees work for the Texas Education Agency instead of reporting to the state board:
“Staff usually works against the board. Sometimes staff can facilitate an agenda of their own.”
And what agenda would that be, Mr. Bradley? Is the professional staff you hold with such contempt interested in something more than maximizing the return on investments for a fund that benefits Texas kids and public education? If that’s what you mean, bring forth the evidence.
“If you sit on the mental health commission, do you have to be retarded? If you sit on the [Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission], do you have to be a drunk?”
– Texas State Board of Education member David Bradley, R-Beaumont Buna, arguing that state board members don’t need to be finance experts to manage the $23 billion Permanent School Fund. Really.
Stay informed with TFN News Clips, a daily digest of news about politics and the religious right. Subscribe here.
Especially over the last week, editorial boards at newspapers across Texas have been focusing on the corrosive politics, blind ignorance and rampant incompetence evident on the State Board of Education. Editorial writers are heaping criticism on state board members who are once again wrecking the work of educators and scholars in crafting new curriculum standards — this time for social studies classrooms in the state’s public schools.
The dismay of San Antonio-Express News editorial writers, for example, was crystal clear today as they explained the state board’s outrageously misinformed decision this month to remove from the social studies standards the author of a popular children’s book, Brown Bear, Brown Bear, What Do You See? Apparently, board member Terri Leo, R-Spring, had conducted a quick Internet search for the author’s name, Bill Martin, and mistakenly reported to board colleagues that he was the same Bill Martin who had written a book about Marxism.
Board members didn’t ask for input from the curriuclum writers, teachers or scholars. They simply accepted Ms. Leo’s research as fact and voted to strip Martin’s name from the Grade 3 standards. (Did they really think curriculum writers wanted third-graders to learn about the author of a book on Marxism?) From the Express-News today:
“How could the board that oversees public education in the great state of Texas have made such a mistake? By relying on research so superficial and shoddy that it would have earned any fifth-grader a failing grade. . . . For once again demonstrating that it can’t be trusted to pass sound judgments about public school curriculum, the State Board of Education owes the people of Texas an apology.”
“Being ignorant is nothing to be ashamed of, but it is nothing to be particularly proud of either. A large and disruptive segment of the Texas State Board of Education is not only ignorant — a state that we all share at various times and on various subjects — it is proudly and aggressively ignorant, which goes beyond simple ignorance and ventures into the territory of malignant stupidity.”
This month’s Texas State Board of Education debate over proposed new social studies curriculum standards provided many opportunities to see censorship at work. One of the most revealing instances of this came when state board member Don McLeroy, R-College Station, proposed adding Margaret Sanger and John Dewey to a list of individuals for high school American history students to study.
Seems like some folks don’t like the Texas Freedom Network’s opposition to far-right efforts to rewrite history in public school classrooms. The volume of our hate mail has increased subsantially, although the quality of the writing and reasoning leaves much to be desired. The writers might have been helped by actually reading what TFN has said instead of relying on nonsense circulated by fringe right-wing pressure groups. Anyway, here are a few excerpts. Enjoy.
Subj: You left-wing loons
The Christian right will always defeat far left loons such as yourselves. We will fight you, and we will win, @ any cost. If you don’t like the country as it is, get out, and move to Venezuela. I’m sure Crazy Chavez will welcome you.
Subj: narrow minded bias
What motivates you? Is this how you begin your morning? Wondering how you can stamp out Christianity, where and how completely? Even to the point of perverting our history? You and your kind are a mystery to me, I confess. Do you seriously have nothing else to do?
Subj: Religion in Textbooks
Your progressive organization(code name for degenerate communists losers)will never change text book facts that this country was founded on Christian/ Judaism values. Many have tried to change or skew history and they all failed. The word of Jesus Christ will never falter or go away and there’s not a darn thing you and your witch’s can do anything about it, missy!!! To try and dismiss these facts and rewrite history is a waste of time . Oh by the way after reading your Queen Bee’s bio, I understand what Texas Freedom Network is all about. Let’s see public affairs director for Planned Parenthood, Wow!!!, who would of known Kathy Miller would have ties with sponsored government abortion clinics. Maybe Abbey Johnson should have a talk with her and set her straight that Pro choice means Pro Murder. Remember live your life by murder and one has a good chance of dying of murder. Maybe that’s what happened to Dr Tiller, you think. By the way is this a satellite organization for NOW, national organization for witches, just curious. Texas Freedom network, now that’s a contradiction in terms because I smell a big mess of “BONDAGE” instead. Oh and ladies ,OBAMA is tanking bad. HA,HA,HA.
A new report from the Guttmacher Institute shows that the nation’s teen pregnancy rate has increased for the first time in more than a decade. During that decade federal, state and local governments have spent billions of dollars on abstinence-0nly programs that deliberately exclude medically accurate information about contraception and other methods of responsible disease prevention.
From Heather Boonstra, senior public policy associate for the Guttmacher Institute:
“After more than a decade of progress, this reversal is deeply troubling. It coincides with an increase in rigid abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, which received major funding boosts under the Bush administration. A strong body of research shows that these programs do not work. Fortunately, the heyday of this failed experiment has come to an end with the enactment of a new teen pregnancy prevention initiative that ensures that programs will be age-appropriate, medically accurate and, most importantly, based on research demonstrating their effectiveness.”
David Barton, head of the Texas-based, Christian-right group WallBuilders, has an interesting guest for his Internet talk show this week. Barton will talk to Brad Dacus, head of the anti-gay Pacific Justice Institute in California. Dacus was a prominent support of Proposition 8, which in 2008 took away the right of gay and lesbian Californians to marry their partners.
This month’s Texas State Board of Education meeting featured many examples of how poorly informed some board members really are. Over a two-day period, the board picked apart a proposed draft of new social studies curriculum standards that teachers, scholars and other community members had spent a year researching, discussing and debating. Often the amendments offered by board members seemed based on a rather distorted (and that’s being charitable) understanding of facts and history. We talked to a number of teachers in the audience. They were appalled.
Pat Hardy, a Republican board member from Fort Worth and a former award-winning social studies teacher, practically begged her colleagues to stop and think. In one particularly revealing discussion, Ms. Hardy saved fellow board member Barbara Cargill from doing something the Republican from The Woodlands near Houston would likely have come to regret.
“Do you want a Texas version of San Francisco? Neither do we! Do you want Texas to be the abortion capital of America? Neither do we!”
– David Grisham of Amarillo, on a Web site that urges people to boycott Houston because the city’s residents elected a gay mayor and Planned Parenthood plans to open a facility there. He also runs a Web site called Repent Amarillo, which opens with the sound of gunshots in a spiritual war for America.
Stay informed with TFN News Clips, a daily digest of news about politics and the religious right. Subscribe here.
Last week’s public hearing on proposed social studies curriculum standards for Texas public schools drew an interesting assortment of right-wing groups and ideologues. In fact, as the State Board of Education heard testimony inside the meeting room, Tea Partiers rallied in the lobby.
The “rally” — if you can call it that — seemed mostly to be a bust, with a fairly small turnout among supporters. In any case, speakers called on the state board to adopt new standards that essentially whitewash difficult problems and periods in American history. Focus on the positive, they urged.
Take slavery for example. Why bother teaching students that for centuries the American colonies and states built economies based on the labor of enslaved Africans? No, Tea Partiers want schools to focus instead on how America finally ended slavery. Otherwise, schools are supposedly “politicizing” American history.
Really? Well, see for yourself:
“The worst day in America beats the best day in any other country”? Really? We doubt slaves would have thought so.
And yes, that’s board member Ken Mercer, R-San Antonio, smiling off to the side in a red sweater.
Less than three weeks into the 2010 election year, it appears that Texas State Board of Education incumbent Ken Mercer, R-San Antonio, has the best-financed challenger among contested state board races. Campaign finance reports were due from candidates by January 15. These reports cover the last six months of 2009. The next finance reports are due 30 days before the March 2 primaries. Following are campaign finance data available for Republican and Democratic candidates for the state board. (I) indicates incumbent. Click here for more information about the candidates. (We have tried to include links to campaign Web sites. Please send us links to campaign Web sites we have missed.)
David Barton, the self-styled historian appointed by the Texas State Board of Education to a panel of curriculum “experts,” is angry with the Texas Freedom Network. In an e-mail to far-right activists last week, the founder of WallBuilders (a Christian-right organization that opposes separation of church and state) brands TFN as a member of the “Secular and Religious Left” and even claims that it’s “the state arm of the radical People for the American Way.”
We don’t know where Barton comes up with such nonsense. “Secular and Religious Left”? If by that he means that we support separation of church and state, then he needs to broaden his definition to include a lot of Americans, many of whom certainly do not identify themselves as “secular” or the “religious left.” (He later lumps TFN in with “anti-religious secularist bigots.” That would surely surprise the more than 600 clergy who are part of our Texas Faith Network, as well as the clergy who are part of our Board of Directors.) And “state arm” of PFAW? TFN has no affiliation whatsoever with that fine organization, although we share many of the same mainstream goals — including our work to stop ideologues like Barton from rewriting history and using public schools to promote his own personal and political agendas.
In particular, Barton takes exception to our criticism of his efforts to corrupt the social studies curriculum standards that determine what nearly 5 million Texas children will learn in their public school classrooms:
“Groups such as the Texas Freedom Network (the state arm of the radical People for the American Way) joined with other radicals in the Religious Left to denounce my mentions of Christianity. They nationally distributed a press release of outrageously false claims that were soon parroted by ABC, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, etc.”
One of the most heated exchanges during Friday’s debate by Texas State Board of Education members over new social studies curriculum standards came during discussion on a standard about women and ethnic minorities working to overcome discrimination in the past.
The proposed standard for high school U.S. history read: “Explain actions taken by people from different racial, ethnic, gender and religious groups to expand economic opportunities and political rights in American society.” Board member Don McLeroy, R-College Station, moved to strike the words “racial, ethnic, gender and religious,” arguing that they were redundant because the standard already said “various groups.”
“It’s not redundant to me,” retorted board member Mavis Knight (D-Dallas), who is African-American. “Because the racial and gender groups you are trying to strike overcame great obstacles to make great contributions. … This board is rewriting history, wanting to sanitize anything that might reflect negatively on our country.”
The debate over the social studies curriculum standards ran so long that the State Board of Education has voted to postpone further debate on the standards until its March meeting. That means the final adoption of the standards will be pushed to May. We will keep you informed on developments. In the meantime, the Texas Freedom Network just sent out the following press release:
Texas Freedom Network President Kathy Miller pointed at the blatant politicization of social studies curriculum standards today as yet more evidence that the Legislature must act to protect the education of Texas schoolchildren.
“When partisan politicians take a wrecking ball to the work of teachers and scholars, you get a document that looks more like a party platform than a social studies curriculum,” Miller said. “The video archive of this week’s meeting would be a great primer for parents and lawmakers on how politics is undermining the education of Texas schoolchildren.”
9:42 – The Texas State Board of Education is resuming its debate and consideration of amendments for social studies curriculum standards. They will focus on high school courses today.
9:44 – It looks like they’ll begin with high school U.S. history this morning. The high school course covers 1877 to the present.
9:47 – Don McLeroy wants to students to learn that the destruction of New Orleans a few years ago wasn’t caused by Hurricane Katrina but by the failure of the levy system. (In other words, it was government’s fault.)
9:54 – We’re getting a preview of the proposed amendments for the high school U.S. history course. Lots of nonsense. We’ll point that out as we move along.
10:07 – McLeroy wants to change the description of U.S. acquisition of new overseas territories in the late 1800s and early 1900s as “expansionism” instead of “imperialism.” The board’s far-right faction has bristled at the idea that the United States engaged in a form of imperialism at one time. But the historical record is pretty clear: we obtained a number of overseas territories and held on to them through the wars (such as in the Philippines). Recognizing this fact isn’t “anti-American.” It’s real history.
10:09 – Pat Hardy is angry that McLeroy wants to remove a reference to propaganda as contributing to U.S. entry into World War I and warns: “Guys, you’re rewriting history now!” We share Hardy’s frustration at the ignorance on display here. It’s appalling.
10:10 – McLeroy debates whether Margaret Sanger should be in the standards. Board member Terri Leo worries that students might learn she had a positive impact on American society. Really. The board votes to exclude Sanger.
During last week’s public hearing on proposed science standards, evolution deniers on the Texas State Board of Education insisted that they had no intention of promoting “intelligent design”/creationism in public schools. Stephen Meyer, co-founder of the anti-evolution Discovery Institute in Seattle, echoed the claims of the board’s anti-science faction. They just want kids to learn “all of the evidence” about evolution, pro and con, we were told.
Oh, talk to the hand.
Why was Meyer invited to serve on a special science curriculum review panel and to speak at the hearing? It certainly wasn’t because of his science credentials — he’s not a research scientist.
Meyer was on the panel because the Discovery Institute is the biggest shill for “intelligent design,” which the Disco folks puff up as a “scientific” alternative to evolution. But because there isn’t a shred of real scientific evidence to support “intelligent design” (essentially creationism dressed up in a lab coat), the Disco Institute spends most of its time attacking evolution.
One of the ways it does this is by hosting “Summer Seminars” for college undergraduates and graduate students. This year’s seminars include “Intelligent Design in the Natural Sciences” and “Intelligent Design in the Social Sciences and Humanities.”
Past speakers have featured such luminaries in the scientific world as:
Meyer, co-founder of the Discovery Institute
Casey Luskin, a lawyer and Disco’s program officer in public policy and legal affairs
William Dembski, who holds doctorates in mathematics and philosophy and a master’s of divinity; served as the director of the short-lived Michael Polanyi Institute, which he described as an “intelligent design think tank” at Baylor University; currently serves on the faculty of the fundamentalist Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth
John West, who holds a doctorate in government, serves as associate director of the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture and vice president for public policy and legal affairs
Paul Nelson, who holds a doctorate in philosophy and is a fellow at the Discovery Institute
Bruce Gordon, doctorate in the philosophy of science, former associate director of the Polanyi Institute at Baylor, currently a research director at the Discovery Institute
Jonathan Witt, doctorate in English and currently a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute
Robert Marks, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at Baylor
Yes, the list includes a smattering of folks who do have doctorates in research science, but accomplished research biologists they’re not. Of course, the Disco Institute also notes this about the seminars:
Each seminar will also include frank treatment of the academic realities that ID researchers confront in graduate school and beyond, and strategies for dealing with them.
Uh huh. We bet that means the anti-evolution movie “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” (click here and here) will be required viewing.
Please. The argument that teaching “weaknesses” of evolution in public schools has nothing to do with promoting “intelligent design”/creationism is a sham. Perpetuating that fraud is why creationists on the Texas state board put Meyer on the science curriculum review panel. It’s why they invited Meyer to speak to the board last week. And it’s why stopping this nonsense is one of the most important things all of us can do to promote a 21st-century science education for Texas students.
Creationists on the Texas State Board of Education have repeatedly insisted that their attempts to dumb down the science curriculum on evolution have nothing to do with promoting their religious beliefs. But often their own words and actions betray them.
At the end of the Jan. 21 public hearing on the science standards, board members were given the opportunity to choose a handful of speakers to close out testimony. Among those chosen by the board’s creationist bloc was one David Muralt, whose affiliation he listed simply as “self.” Muralt put the lie to creationists’ claims that they aren’t trying to promote religion in science classrooms. We have transcribed his testimony (from the 4:26:44 mark on the Full Board Part A 1/21 archived audio file), which includes:
Why do we persist teaching students the religion of atheistic humanism, under the guise of scientific, factual evolution? Which is neither scientific nor factual, when you only present one point of view.
Teaching students that they evolved and are nothing more than animals degrades their quality of life, and robs them of meaning and purpose for life. The twisted reasoning of humanism in seeking to exalt man, reduces him to an animal devoid of will and the ability to choose the virtuous. The fruits of this God-denying teaching are: lying, cheating, stealing, promiscuity, chemical abuse, suicide, crime of all sorts, and a reduction in academic achievement.
There is no factual scientific proof that functional complex life has arisen from disorder by chance. Who are you going to believe – God that was there, or men that weren’t?
Mr. Muralt’s testimony reveals two special conceits of the those behind the creationist movement. First, they believe they know more about science than all the trained scientists who have been studying and researching evolution for more than a century. Second, creationists like Mr. Muralt and his allies on the state board believe only themselves to be truly people of faith. In their eyes, those of us who support giving students a science education that’s based actually on science are atheistic humanists who reject God.
Such arrogance is as astonishing as it is insulting to all people of faith. Swept up in their blanket condemnation are, for example, the Roman Catholic Church, countless mainline Protestants and the majority of Jews. Of course, many other faiths also pose no conflict between science and belief in God. (And enough with the implicit smear that atheists are somehow to blame for “lying, cheating, stealing, promiscuity, chemical abuse, suicide, crime of all sorts.”)
This shouldn’t be surprising, of course. Recall what state board Chairman Don McLeroy, R-College Station, told congregants in a church lecture in July 2005. McLeroy was recounting the debate over proposed biology textbooks two years earlier. He noted that he was one of only “four really conservative, orthodox Christians on the board … who were willing to stand up to the textbooks and say that they don’t present the weaknesses of evolution.” So the other board members weren’t real Christians?
The Texas Freedom Network has always supported the right of families and congregations to pass on their own teachings about faith to their children. But science classes are for teaching science, not religion. No one has right to use public schools to promote their own religious beliefs over everybody else’s.
UPDATE: Dr. McLeroy has asked that we include an additional passage from his church lecture in 2005, in which he discussed what happened during the state board’s debate over biology textbooks in 2003. We are glad to do so here:
(W)e weren’t about to convince any scientists, but we couldn’t convince fellow board members that these books should have evidence. And the more I look back on it, I believe if we would have challenged the naturalistic assumptions that nature is all there is with our fellow board members and challenged these people that were talking about it a little bit that brought up testimony, possibly we would have gotten a few more votes because a lot of these dear friends of mine on the State Board of Education are good, strong Christians that are active in Young Life and other activities. But they were able to totally not even worry about the fact that evolution’s assumption that nature is all there is is in total conflict with the way they live their life.
We appreciate Dr. McLeroy’s interest in an honest and fair dialogue.
Dr. McLeroy’s passage acknowledges what is essentially a larger doctrinal dispute involving differing interpretations of scripture and theology. We believe, however, that public school science classes are not the place to settle doctrinal disputes and disagreements among people of faith.
UPDATED UPDATE: Please note again the passage from Dr. McLeroy’s lecture that we added after our original post. Dr. McLeroy makes it clear that he voted against new biology textbooks in 2003, and wanted his fellow board members to do so, because he believed that those textbooks contradicted his and their religious beliefs. After all, why else would it matter whether his fellow board members are “good, strong Christians” and that evolution (as he characterizes it) “is in total conflict with the way they live their life.” That is clearly not an argument based on science. It’s an argument based on faith and religious doctrine, and public school science classrooms are not the place for such a debate.
Have you wondered how Texas State Board of Education Chairman Don McLeroy persuaded fellow board members last month to add an amendment weakening proposed science standards dealing with evolution? Well, here’s an interesting Web page put together by an enterprising fellow: “Collapse of a Texas Quote Mine.” The site looks at the many quotes from reputable sources that Dr. McLeroy used to justify calling into question common descent, a core concept of evolutionary theory. The site lists each of the quotes culled by McLeroy (or whoever provided his talking points) and explains how they were distorted and taken out of context in the cause of promoting pseudoscientific nonsense.
Here’s an example. The Web site notes that Dr. McLeroy cherry-picked this quote from Ernst Mayr’sWhat Evolution Is (2001):
…the various steps in the history of the change from ape to man … is entirely based on inferences and any part of it may be refuted at any time.
Sounds like skepticism about a key part of human evolution over time, yes? Well, Mayr certainly didn’t mean it to be. This is the quote in context from his book:
Yet, as far as the general trend in human evolution is concerned, the fossil record is of considerable assistance. By making use of the interpretations of numerous authors, but relying particularly on Stanley (1996) and Wrangham (2001), I am developing a sequence of historical narratives that reconstruct the various steps in the history of the change from ape to man. The resulting picture is entirely based on inferences and any part of it may be refuted at any time. But developing a cohesive story is far more instructive than merely compiling a list of unconnected facts. The most important certainty that has emerged from recent studies is that Homo sapiens is the end product of two major ecological shifts (habitat preference) of our hominid ancestors.
Of course, quote mining is intellectually dishonest, but it’s hardly a new tactic. Evolution deniers have been using it for long time now. So it’s good to see someone document the nonsense. Check it out here.
The header above is from the subject line of a wild-eyed screed sent circulating around the Internets this past weekend by Donna Garner, a former language arts teacher in Central Texas. Social conservatives on the Texas State Board of Education seem to think Ms. Garner is some kind of curriculum guru. (Never mind that most other folks see her as little more than a right-wing gadfly with an e-mail list.)
Last year Ms. Garner helped the board’s far-right faction (led by board chairman Don McLeroy) derail a more than two-year process revising the state’s language arts curriculum standards. (See here and here.) Now she seems to have turned her attention to evolution and proposed science curriculum standards. The e-mail criticizes the state board for giving tentative approval last month to new standards that don’t require students to learn phony “weaknesses” of evolution. It mocks three Republican board members, in particular, each of whom voted to keep the “weaknesses” requirement out of the standards. They “all claim to be conservative Republicans,” the e-mail sneeringly states. One of the three, Bob Craig of Lubbock, the e-mail notes, “says he’s a ’strong Christian.’” And on it goes. (Will any of Ms. Garner’s far-right friends on the board denounce these snide remarks about their fellow board members? We’re not holding our breath.)
Ms. Garner also pretends to know something about science, going on about the difference between “micro-evolution” and “macro-evolution” and listing “weaknesses” of evolution (the Cambrian explosion, gaps in the fossil record, yadda yadda yadda). It’s all standard pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo that evolution deniers have been using to try to water down science education in our kids’ classrooms.
But the real kicker comes at the end, when the depth of loathing for evolution and science becomes crystal clear:
Jeffrey Dahmer, one of America’s most infamous serial killers who cannibalized more than 17 boys before being captured, gave an [sic] last interview with Dateline NBC nine months before his death, and he said the following about why he acted as he did: “If a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges? That’s how I thought anyway. I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all just came from the slime. When we died, you know, that was it, there was nothing….” (Dateline NBC, The Final Interview, Nov. 29, 1994).
This quote has been making the rounds for years in evangelical circles. In fact, Dahmer seems to have proclaimed himself a born-again Christian after his father sent him evangelical materials in prison.
In any case, the e-mail clearly suggests that people who accept the science of evolution are atheists: “The atheists are winning in Texas.” That’s insulting enough for people of faith who see no conflict with science. But what else is Ms. Garner trying to say here with the story about Dahmer? That we’re responsible for serial murderers like him? Or worse, that we’re all potential cannibalistic murderers ourselves because we accept the science of evolution?
This is repulsive stuff. So what else is new? Remember what Ben Stein (of the anti-evolution movie Expelled) said last year:
Love of God and compassion and empathy leads you to a very glorious place, and science leads you to killing people.
Sickening, yes?
It’s time for Chairman McLeroy and his fellow board members to come clean. Do they agree with Ms. Garner and approve of the kind of repulsive and shameful rhetoric being used to attack those who don’t share her particular religious views? We really want to know.
UPDATE: Correction. Ms. Garner forwarded the original e-mail referenced above, with her own apparent additions marked in red (including the quote from Dahmer). Who signed and apparently wrote the original? Kelly Coghlan, a Houston attorney who wrote the so-called “Religious Viewpoints Anti-Discrimination Act” that the Texas Legislature passed in 2007. That legislation, HB 3678, allows students to turn public school events into opportunities to evangelize. Read more about it here and here. Coghlan’s e-mail includes information and links from the creationist Texans for Better Science Education. In any case, whether or not Garner wrote the original e-mail, she amended and forwarded it to her list. Now what do board members have to say?
This year’s report – The 81st Legislature: Change at the Capitol? – focuses on Texas lawmakers who promote the culture wars in Austin. The report also includes a legislative history of key issues (private school vouchers, sex education, textbook censorship and stem cell research), our annual compilation of the crazy things folks on the religious right said last year, and updated facts and figures in our roundup of far-right groups in Texas.
The level of arrogance displayed by anti-evolution pressure groups and their activists in the war on science has been astonishing.
We have witnessed, for example, creationists openly question the faith of people who see no conflict between their religious beliefs and accepting the science of evolution. (Of course, their rhetoric gets even more heated when they attack atheists.) Now the Texas Freedom Network has obtained an e-mail to the Texas Education Agency (TEA) that provides yet more evidence of this arrogance — and the contempt evolution deniers have for those of us who want Texas kids to get a 21st-century science education based on facts, not ideology.
When TFN learned in November that the Texas State Board of Education would limit testimony to just four hours at its January public hearing on proposed science standards, we protested. We asked supporters of sound science to call on the board to reverse that decision. After all, these standards will be in place for a decade and will dictate the science education of a generation of Texas kids. The least that state board members could do was listen to the concerns of fellow citizens traveling to Austin for the hearing. (And we knew that creationist groups were calling on their supporters to testify at the January hearing.)
Dear TEA: The Texas Freedom Network has requested its supporters to besiege the TEA with emails complaining that not enough public testimony time is being allowed on the new TEKS science standards. I encourage you to resist this pressure from this special interest group. What more or different things could be said than were already said in the November 20 meeting? How much time would ever be enough for these people? Clearly, they simply want to wear out the SBOE with their mantra. Scientific truth is not determined by consensus, and scientists are not the High Priests of our society. (the Lawyers are!) Enough of them have had their say, and I encourage you to hold the line. Enough is enough.
Dr. Charles M. Garner
TEKS Reviewer
Now, that’s real chutzpah, yes? After all, the state board had invited Garner and the other five members of the official curriculum review panel to speak at the hearing. And the panel’s two other evolution opponents included a co-founder of the Discovery Institute — a political pressure group that masquerades as a science institute. Talk about special interests.
Well, if Garner isn’t interested in hearing what fellow citizens think about efforts by evolution deniers to dumb down science education in Texas, what does he think about his colleagues at Baylor?
The Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at Baylor University is committed to the highest standards of scientific inquiry in the search for objective truth about the natural universe. From the time of Francis Bacon, this search for truth has been through the scientific method, in which the veracity of a hypothesis is tested by experimentation.
Evolution, a foundational principle of modern biological sciences, is supported by overwhelming scientific evidence. It is fundamental to the understanding of modern biochemistry, and our faculty incorporate the principle of evolution throughout the biochemistry curriculum. We are a science department, and we do not teach alternative hypotheses or philosophically deduced theories that cannot be tested rigorously.
“Evolution, a foundational principle of modern biology, is supported by overwhelming scientific evidence and is accepted by the vast majority of scientists. Because it is fundamental to the understanding of modern biology, the faculty in the Biology Department at Baylor University, Waco, TX, teach evolution throughout the biology curriculum. We are in accordance with the American Association for Advancement of Science’s statement on evolution. We are a science department, so we do not teach alternative hypotheses or philosophically deduced theories that cannot be tested rigorously.”
Does the fossil record support the idea of biological change over time (biological evolution)?
Yes. The fossil record clearly indicates
a progression in complexity of organisms from very simple fossil forms in the oldest rocks (>3.5 billion years old) to a broad spectrum from simple to complex forms in younger rocks,
that some organisms that were once common are now extinct, and
that the living organisms inhabiting our world today are similar (but generally not the same) as organisms represented as fossils in young sedimentary deposits, which in turn have evolutionary ancestors represented as fossils in yet older rocks.
Mammals, for example, are prevalent today and can be traced back in the fossil record for approximately 200 million years, but are not present as mammals in the fossil record before that; however, fossil forms that have reasonably been interpreted to be associated with the evolutionary precursors to mammals are found in older rocks.
Whether biological evolution occurs has not been a matter of scientific debate for more than a century. It is considered a proven fact. The specific mechanisms of biological change over time continue to be a topic of active research, and include mechanisms proposed by Charles Darwin as well as more recently developed ideas based on our growing knowledge of genetics and molecular biology. Using the methods of modern science, our knowledge of the fundamental mechanisms of life has grown enormously since the initial characterization of the role of DNA in reproduction, inheritance and evolution in the mid-1950s.
Of course, we’re under no illusions. We realize these strong statements from colleagues at his own university still won’t be good enough for Garner. Nothing would be — except for surrendering science education to an ideological agenda.
(Thanks to our science friends who pointed us to these passages on the Baylor Web sites.)
In 2005 the Texas Freedom Network opposed passage of a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and civil unions in Texas. We pointed out that same-sex marriage was already illegal in the state. The measure was simply another divisive, mean-spirited “culture war” distraction from issues far more important to working families, like good neighborhood schools and affordable health care. Gov. Rick Perry and his supporters on the religious right called the amendment necessary to “protect” marriage. Actually, the measure was more important for mobilizing social conservatives in advance of the 2006 state elections.
As her partner of 17 years slipped into a coma, Janice Langbehn pleaded with doctors and anyone who would listen to let her into the woman’s hospital room.
Eight anguishing hours passed before Langbehn would be allowed into Jackson Memorial Hospital’s Ryder Trauma Center. By then, she could only say her final farewell as a priest performed the last rites on 39-year-old Lisa Marie Pond.
Jackson staffers advised Langbehn that she could not see Pond earlier because the hospital’s visitation policy in cases of emergency was limited to immediate family and spouses — not partners. In Florida, same-sex marriages or partnerships are not recognized. On Friday, two years after her partner’s death, Langbehn and her attorneys were in federal court, claiming emotional distress and negligence in a suit they filed last June.
Jackson attorneys filed a motion to dismiss the case on grounds that the hospital has no obligation to allow patients’ visitors.
Pond’s medical problems began in February 2007 when she, Langbehn and their three adopted children were aboard a cruise ship docked in Miami. The Washington state couple and their children were on vacation.
Pond suddenly collapsed from a heart attack and was rushed to the trauma center.
Though Langbehn had documents declaring her Pond’s legal guardian and giving her the medical ”power of attorney,” Jackson officials refused to recognize her or the kids as family.
Langbehn, who still lives in Washington, was not available for comment Friday, but in a 2007 interview with The Miami Herald she said, “Any family should have the right to hold their loved one’s hand in the last moments of life, and we were denied that.”
The creationists on the Texas State Board of Education just can’t seem to help themselves. Once again one of the board’s far-right members – Ken Mercer, R-San Antonio — makes clear that religious agendas are driving efforts to dumb down science education in Texas public schools.
Writing in a San Antonio Express-News opinion column, Mr. Mercer says the claim that he and other creationists are trying to promote religion by challenging evolution in public school science classrooms is a “red herring.” Then, following a familar pattern, he contradicts himself:
For the last twenty years, teachers have been required to present both the strengths and weaknesses of scientific theories; and I challenge the Express-News to find one science book approved by the SBOE that includes either creation science or intelligent design.
In fact, members of Texans for Better Science Education, who listened to the numerous testifiers at the public hearing, have stated that the three Republican SBOE members who voted to delete the “weaknesses” provision were swayed by “Darwinists, atheists, ACLU members, and at least one bona fide signer of the infamous Humanist Manifesto III, in an attempt to promote indoctrination over critical thinking skills.”
I pray for my three friends, Pat Hardy of Ft. Worth , Bob Craig of Lubbock, and Geraldine “Tincy” Miller of Dallas. They voted against the Republican Party platform and allowed themselves to be constantly lobbied by prominent atheists and secular humanists. These three Republicans will now have to stand accountable before their constituents.
So… attacking evolution has nothing to do with religion, but defending sound science instruction on evolution is “indoctrination” promoted by atheists and secular humantists. Got it?
And attacking evolution has nothing to do with religion, but Mr. Mercer is praying for three Republicans who apparently fell under the influence of said atheists and humanists and even betrayed the Republican Party platform.
(Just curious — which does Mr. Mercer consider more sacred, the Bible or the Republican Party platform? And is he even capable of distinguishing between the two anymore?)
“This is a battle of academic freedom. This is a battle over freedom of speech. It’s an issue of freedom of religion.”
Oh, really? If creationists are telling the truth that they aren’t trying to promote religion in public schools, then why are they framing the debate as being “an issue of freedom of religion”?
Using the Texas GOP Bible platform as a club to attack moderate Republicans is a longstanding tactic of the religious right in this state. So it is no surprise to see Texas culture warriors reciting chapter and verse of the party platform in an attempt to strong-arm State Board of Education members into voting to insert phony “weaknesses” of evolution into the state’s science standards. Board member Ken Mercer, R-San Antonio, played the orthodoxy card in his opinion piece in the San Antonio Express News this week:
I pray for my three friends, Pat Hardy of Ft. Worth , Bob Craig of Lubbock, and Geraldine “Tincy” Miller of Dallas. They voted against the Republican Party platform and allowed themselves to be constantly lobbied by prominent atheists and secular humanists.
But have Mercer and his friends actually looked at what the Texas Republican Party platform has to say about this matter? Here is the relevant passage from the current GOP platform, which was drafted and approved in 2008:
Theories of Origin – We support objective teaching and equal treatment of strengths and weaknesses of scientific theories, including Intelligent Design. We believe theories of life origins and environmental theories should be taught as scientific theory, not scientific law. Teachers and students should be able to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of these theories openly and without fear of retribution or discrimination of any kind.
Mercer and his fellow evolution deniers on the state board have protested time and again that they do not want “intelligent design”/creationism taught in Texas classrooms. But that is expressly what their supposedly authoritative Republican Party platform demands. We hate to be literalists about this whole thing, but it only seems fair to hold Mercer and his friends on the state board to the same standard they want to apply to others.
Which is it, Mr. Mercer? Is the party platform (gasp) wrong, or does it let the cat you so desperately want to silence out of the bag?
If you find yourself in a church, synagogue or mosque in Texas this weekend, you might just hear Charles Darwin’s name come up in the sermon (and not to label him a devil!). It’s Evolution Weekend again, and TFN is proud to join The Clergy Letter Project in sponsoring events in Texas congregations.
What is Evolution Weekend, you say?
Evolution Weekend is an opportunity for serious discussion and reflection on the relationship between religion and science. One important goal is to elevate the quality of the discussion on this critical topic – to move beyond sound bites. A second critical goal is to demonstrate that religious people from many faiths and locations understand that evolution is sound science and poses no problems for their faith.
More than 1,000 congregations around the world are participating, including more than 50 in Texas. To celebrate, TFN Insider is pleased to welcome guest blogger Rev. Jeremy Rutledge to offer his insights on religion and science. Jeremy is minister at Covenant Church, a congregation affiliated with the American Baptist Church and the Alliance of Baptists. Read Jeremy’s comments after the jump. Read the rest of this entry »
In TFN News Clips (subscribe here) last week, we included a piece from the Christian Science Monitor about efforts by creationists to pass so-called “academic freedom” bills in various states. The bills provide legal support for teachers who challenge evolution with creationist arguments in their public school science classrooms. Texas has no such law (yet).
In any case, we failed to note a choice quote from Texas State Board of Education Chairman Don McLeroy, R-College Station. The story explained that during the board’s debate on new science standards in January, McLeroy succeeded in passing a particular anti-evolution amendment to the draft document.
“That shocked a lot of people,” says the chairman, Don McLeroy, a self-identified “young earth creationist.” But Mr. McLeroy insists such efforts are well within the law. “It’s certainly not a religious standard…. People are probably opposed to [the new language] for ideological reasons.”
Well, it’s certainly true that people were shocked — shocked that a majority of state board members had somehow accepted the pseudoscientific babble the good dentist offered as arguments for the amendment. (For more on those arguments, see an earlier post here.) Interestingly, McLeroy had declined a request from some board members to have scientists in the audience explain the implications of his and other amendments being offered. Scientists were appalled, as the Houston Chronicle noted:
Also added to the proposed standards by board Chairman Don McLeroy, R-Bryan, is an amendment that directs science teachers and students to “describe the sufficiency or insufficiency of common ancestry to explain the sudden appearance, stasis and sequential nature of groups in the fossil record.”
They are asking students to explain something that does not exist, said David Hillis, a biology professor at the University of Texas at Austin and MacArthur Foundation “genius award” winner.
“This new proposed language is absurd. It shows very clearly why the board should not be rewriting the science standards, especially when they introduce new language that has not even been reviewed by a single science expert,” Hillis said.
But the real howler is the second part of McLeroy’s quote:
“It’s certainly not a religious standard…. People are probably opposed to [the new language] for ideological reasons.”
Oh, do tell. Physician, heal thyself.
The board will take a final vote on the standards in March. Let state board members know that you want them to support a 21st-century science education for Texas kids. Find out how here.
The header above is the subject line in the latest fundraising e-mail from the Free Market Foundation, the Texas affiliate of the Christian-right pressure group Focus on the Family. We suppose “Martians Invade!” sounded too silly to them.
It’s sad that in a country founded on the principle of religious freedom, pressure groups still foster such hatred for people who choose not to practice any religion. In any case, Free Market’s e-mail lists a variety of dangers posed by the atheist horde supposedly descending upon the Lone Star State. Much of the list is standard stuff, such as taking God out of the Pledge of Allegiance, blocking prayer in schools and abortion.
But taxes?
Another big issue is taxes. We’re all tired of our property taxes being raised each year without being allowed to vote on this issue. We are working hard to support legislation to cap raising appraisal taxes more than 5% unless approved by local citizens. These tax increases must stop!
Goodness. What in the world are those evil atheists up to? Not only do they want to destroy all that is holy, but now they want to tax everybody to death.
In all seriousness, this is simply another example of the religious right using faith as a political weapon. TFN has no official position on property taxes. That issue is simply beyond the scope of our mission. But we’ve seen Free Market’s tactic replicated by countless religious-right groups: use fear and hatred to raise money or stir up religious activists in support of or opposition to some partisan agenda, even if it has nothing to do with faith. And never mind who you have to smear to do it.
In fact, the ICR used the occasion to broadcast their belief that any Christian who accepts evolution is inviting “swift destruction,” even implying that pastors who participated in Evolution Weekend are “false teachers…who privily shall bring in damnable heresies.” (Apparently they continue to speak the “King’s English” over at the ICR, naturally preferring the King James Bible.) Read the latest e-mail alert from our young earth creationist friends at the ICR after the jump. Read the rest of this entry »
January’s evolution show trial put on by the Texas State Board of Education gave the anti-evolution Discovery Institute a warm fuzzy because one of its co-founders got to share the stage with real scientists. (If you missed it, check out our live blogging that started here.) Because they can’t provide a shred of real scientific evidence to support their anti-evolution babble, the Disco folks try to set up “debates” in reputable venues just for the publicity. The Texas scientists who shared the microphone at the state board hearing didn’t have much choice — state board members had appointed them to a review panel that was part of the formal process for revising public school science curriculum standards.
But given a choice, most scientists aren’t willing to participate in a “debate” with folks from the Discovery Institute. Why? Because the Disco folks haven’t bothered to do the hard work of providing scientific evidence to support their positions. Now PZ Myers tells readers that the Discovery Institute recently asked a professor at the University of Vermont, Nicholas Gotelli, for a debate about evolution and “intelligent design” on his campus. In short, Prof. Gotelli’s answer was along the lines of “you’re joking, right?” You can read the whole delicious exchange for yourself, but here’s a taste of the professor’s stinging reply:
(I)sn’t it sort of pathetic that your large, well-funded institute must scrape around, panhandling for a seminar invitation at a little university in northern New England? Practicing scientists receive frequent invitations to speak in science departments around the world, often on controversial and novel topics. If creationists actually published some legitimate science, they would receive such invitations as well.
In a counter opinion piece, Ms. Leo claims that no board member is trying to remove evolution from the public school science curriculum. “There is also no Board member who is seeking to implement religious beliefs into public school science curricula,” she writes.
For the past twenty years, students in Texas have been required “to analyze, review, and critique scientific explanations, including hypotheses and theories, as to the strengths and weaknesses using scientific evidence and information.” This standard has been applied to all scientific theories. Pro-Evolution Advocates, however, want evolution to be singled out and taught differently from the other theories. They want evolution to be taught without including the weaknesses of this theory.
The evolutionists want the time-tested standard to be removed from our Texas standards and, hence, from our textbooks and teaching materials. The twenty-year old standard does not state nor imply the teaching of religion, just “scientific explanations and scientific evidence.” If a teacher in our state had used this twenty-year-old standard as a “backdoor vehicle” through which to teach students religion, the ACLU most certainly would have sued by now.
There’s plenty more in the rest of her screed, but we’ll focus right now on the dishonesty in just those two paragraphs above.
Ms. Leo falsely claims that the “strengths and weaknesses” standard has been applied to all scientific theories. In fact, Ms. Leo was one of four creationist board members in 2003 who voted to reject proposed new biology textbooks because they didn’t include phony “weaknesses” of evolution promoted by creationists organizations like the Discovery Institute (and any number of evangelical Christian churches). They didn’t vote to reject any textbooks because they didn’t include “weaknesses” of other scientific theories. Not one. They singled out evolution.
Then when a majority of board members voted last month to keep the “strengths and weaknesses” language out of a new standards draft, creationists on the board offered a series of amendments targeting one theory — evolution. In fact, they succeeded in getting two of those amendments adopted, both challenging a core concept of evolution, common descent.
The only people singling out evolution and wanting it taught differently than other scientific theories are those in the creationist bloc. They claim that the “strengths and weaknesses” language has caused no problems in the past, but their own actions prove that’s a lie. They didn’t have the votes on the board to prevail in their war against evolution in 2003. They hope to have enough votes in 2011, when publishers submit new biology textbooks for adoption. In fact, members of the creationist bloc have already said they will insist that those new textbooks include phony “weaknesses” of evolution. If the textbooks don’t include that nonsence, the creationist bloc will move to reject them regardless of what they hear from real scientists.
Ms. Leo goes on, arguing that creationists are just trying to “broaden horizons and enhance thinking” about “varying scientific viewpoints.”
No. They are trying to twist the public school science curriculum into a vehicle for promoting their own narrow religious beliefs over everyone else’s. That’s what Sen. Ellis and Rep. Rose were rightly criticizing in their op-ed.
The truth is that creationists can’t provide a shred of scientific evidence against evolution. Every argument they have made about alleged “weaknesses” of evolution has been debunked by scientific research. Until that changes, their attacks against evolution have no place in a 21st-century science classroom.
Teaching young people about sexuality and health should be serious business. But you wouldn’t know that from the materials used in many Texas classrooms…
Get a sneak peek at a video previewing the release of a new Texas Freedom Network Education Fund report on sexuality education in Texas public schools. (The scene in the video is pulled directly from materials actually used in Texas public school classrooms. We wish we were kidding.)
We will release the report at 11 a.m., Tuesday, Feb. 24, at the Texas Capitol in Austin. You are welcome to join us on the North Steps of the Capitol for the press conference.
The full report - as well as two more videos – will also be available tomorrow on the Web site. So be sure to check back to www.JustSayDontKnow.org tomorrow after 11 a.m.
(Media Inquiries: Contact Dan Quinn at dan@tfn.org, or 512-322-0545.)
Today the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund released a major new study detailing how public schools in our state teach young people about sexuality and health.
And the news is not good.
Our new report — Just Say Don’t Know: Sexuality Education in Texas Public Schools — conclusively demonstrates that Texas is failing families and students when it comes to sexuality education. Less than 4 percent of Texas school districts give young people any information about responsible pregnancy and disease prevention. Even worse, the information students do receive about sexuality and health is often grossly distorted or simply wrong.
You can get an idea of the type of troubling materials students encounter in sex education by viewing the video below. (The information in this video comes straight from actual materials used in Texas classrooms.)
Garner’s new e-mail screed takes us to task for reporting about the outrageous nonsense abstinence-only programs teach Texas teens about sexuality and health. She devotes much of her e-mail to defending Scott and White Worth the Wait, the most widely used abstinence-only curriculum in the state.
She is particularly upset that our report notes Worth the Wait in the section about abstinence-only programs promoting fear and shame about sexuality. In a review of Worth the Wait’s materials, SIECUS notes pretty much the same thing:
Worth the Wait does incorporate important topics suggested by the Guidelines, such as puberty, anatomy, sexual abuse, and legal issues related to sexuality, and the curriculum is based on reliable sources of data. Despite these strengths, Worth the Wait relies on messages of fear, discourages contraceptive use, and promotes biased views of gender, marriage, and pregnancy options.
Garner argues that “nothing could be further from the truth.” We disagree.
But the really goofy stuff comes at the top of Garner’s e-mail.
First, Texas Freedom Network is behind this supposed “study.” … Texas Freedom Network has been in close association for many years with Planned Parenthood (performed 289,750 abortions in 2006-07) and the Human Rights Campaign (largest homosexual organization in the country). TFN, PP, and HRC are like a “sisterhood” and work in conjunction with one another to destroy any vestiges of traditional marriage and traditional values that are left in our country.
The Sisterhood is joined at the hip by ex-TFN presidents, Cecile Richards and Samantha Smoot, who work closely with TFN’s present leader, Kathy Miller.
When reading any ”studies” that come from this group we must remember who profits: Planned Parenthood makes money both ways — either on abortions and/or on contraceptives. HRC perpetuates its organization with an increase in homosexual activity. TFN keeps its board members happy so long as it grabs the media spotlight with its outrageous allegations against conservative State Board of Education members.
Well, now you know.
We would respond to all that, but Kathy is already running late for her meeting with the Sisterhood’s Politburo.
If you’re a regular visitor to TFN Insider, you know that sound science is under siege in Texas. We have one of the highest teen birthrates in the country, but extremists demand that public schools teach abstinence-only in sexuality education classes. Creationists on the State Board of Education are trying to dumb down the public school science curriculum by attacking evolution. And zealots want to ban embryonic stem cell research that gives hope to families struggling with serious medical conditions like cancer and Parkinston’s disease.
Have you had enough?
You can stand up for science and fight back against the religious right’s extremism by attending the Texas Freedom Network’s Legislative Lobby Day on March 10 in Austin.
Before lobby teams head over to the Capitol, we will provide four break-out sessions on critical issues:
sexuality education
stem cell research
evolution, the public school science curriuclum, and the State Board of Education
youth advocacy and sex ed (a specially designed track for youth advocates under 24 years of age and others interested in mobilizing youth on this issue)
We have many wonderful allies, but TFN remains the only broad-based organization specifically devoted to fighting the religious right in Texas — and we need your help to win this important fight against extremism.
Lobby Day beings at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, March 10, at the First United Methodist Church Family Life Center. The center is located at 1300 Lavaca Street near the Capitol in Austin.
The folks at Free Market Foundation think their organization needs a new name. The Focus on the Family affiliate in Texas spends a lot of time trying to use government for promoting conservative Christianity and suing school districts that resist. So in an e-mail blast asking supporters for help with a new name, they acknowledge that the ”Free Market Foundation” brand doesn’t quite match what they do:
We think Free Market sounds more like an economic “think tank” than a pro-family policy organization.
They’ve been around since 1972 and just figured that out?
Moreover, the word “foundation” leads people to think we dole out money to other worthy causes.
And lastly, it is challenging to build grassroots momentum by promoting two names – Free Market Foundation and our legal division, Liberty Legal Institute.
We believe we would be more efficient, reduce confusion and have greater impact by adopting ONE name.
We agree. And being generous folks here at Texas Freedom Network, we’re happy to help. So how about:
Focus on the Family-Texas (Truth in advertising, at least.)
Texans for the Right Religion
Lawsuits-R-Us: Suing Schools for Jesus since 1972
SOS: Sue Our Schools Coalition
Texans for Merging Church and State
Fund More Fundamentalists (They wouldn’t have to change their initials!)
Whatever name they choose, we’re prepared to make a deal. TFN will keep supporting the right of students to practice their own religious faith if Free Market Foundation will stop trying to force all the other students to join them.
Feel free to offer other name suggestions here. We’re sure Free Market will appreciate the help.
Those states that … consume the most porn tend to be more conservative and religious than states with lower levels of consumption, the study finds.
“Some of the people who are most outraged turn out to be consumers of the very things they claimed to be outraged by,” [according to the report's author].
Eight of the top 10 pornography consuming states gave their electoral votes to John McCain in last year’s presidential election – Florida and Hawaii were the exceptions. While six out of the lowest 10 favoured Barack Obama.
Church-goers bought less online porn on Sundays – a 1% increase in a postal code’s religious attendance was associated with a 0.1% drop in subscriptions that day. However, expenditures on other days of the week brought them in line with the rest of the country, Edelman finds.
Residents of 27 states that passed laws banning gay marriages boasted 11% more porn subscribers than states that don’t explicitly restrict gay marriage.
States where a majority of residents agreed with the statement “I have old-fashioned values about family and marriage,” bought 3.6 more subscriptions per thousand people than states where a majority disagreed. A similar difference emerged for the statement “AIDS might be God’s punishment for immoral sexual behaviour.”
The top porn-consuming state? Utah. A map in the report indicates that Texas falls somewhere in the middle of the pack, but still ahead of a number of major liberal-leaning states, particularly California and in New England.
It’s bad enough that Texas is failing teens by promoting ignorance about responsible pregnancy and disease prevention in sexuality education classes. But is it really too much to ask that public policy-makers and assorted pressure groups not wallow in ignorance as well?
Our new report on sexuality education reveals that more than nine in 10 public school districts in Texas teach either abstinence-only or nothing at all when it comes to sexuality education. That’s the case despite the state’s high rate of teen births, the increasing problem of sexually transmitted diseases among youth and recent major studies showing that abstinence-only programs are simply ineffective. (See here for one such study. Our report, page 2, notes others.)
Jonathan Saenz of the Free Market Foundation, a conservative group that supports abstinence-based programs, questioned the criticism of those programs, citing links between the Texas Freedom Network and Planned Parenthood.
“These groups want teenagers to have more sex and learn more about sex at an earlier age,” he said. “You can give students greater access to contraception and abortion, but that’s not good for Texas.”
Complete nonsense. Educating young people about responsible pregnancy and disease prevention is a way to decrease the number of abortions and raise healthy teens. Keeping them ignorant certainly isn’t working.
We have just seen the first legislative vote aimed at reining in the Texas State Board of Education. Yesteday the Texas House Public Education Committee unanimously passed House Bill 772, which would require that state board meetings be streamed live over the Internet in video and audio. We released the following statement from Texas Freedom Network President Kathy Miller:
For too long this board has been able to operate outside the watchful eye of parents and other taxpayers, and lawmakers seem to have had enough. Ideologues have turned the board into a playground for promoting personal political agendas rather than the interests of Texas schoolchildren. If installing a camera helps rein in those board members, we think taxpayers will be well served.
Kathy testified in favor of the bill, which was filed by state Rep. Donna Howard, D-Austin. Rep. Howard and other lawmakers have been filing other key SBOE reform bills as well. TFN Insider will be closely following the progress of all these bills.
Dr. McLeroy and his supporters insist that their desire to challenge evolution in biology classrooms is not about promoting religion in public schools. Yet he makes clear in the Statesman piece that his religious beliefs are the source of his objections to evolution:
Had enough yet? Had enough of politicians and far-right pressure groups trying to undermine science education in our public schools, hold back important medical research into stem cells, and keep young people ignorant about how to protect themselves from pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases? Well, things won’t change unless you and other mainstream Texans take a stand.
Stand up for science at Texas Freedom Network’s legislative Lobby Day on Tuesday, March 10, in Austin. We will provide informative training sessions on these important issues before heading over the Capitol to meet with lawmakers. Click here to find out more about how you can participate. You can make a difference.
UPDATE: Online registration for Lobby Day has ended, but you can still participate by calling 512-322-0545.
Supporters of sound science education and stem cell research had a big presence at the Texas Capitol on Tuesday. More than 200 activists registered for Texas Freedom Network ’s Lobby Day, which included training sessions on supporting stem cell research, responsible sexuality education and sound science education in public schools. Nearly two dozen teams of activists then marched to the Capitol for appointments with lawmakers and staff from around the state.
TFN’s field team is very grateful that so many supporters took the time to stand up for science in Texas. (Click here to find out more about our Stand Up for Science campaign.) This kind of direct contact between constituents and elected officials is critical to TFN’s efforts to promote sound science.
Thursday might offer an early test of the success of yesterday’s lobbying. The Senate Health and Human Services Committee will hold the Legislature’s first hearing on a stem cell bill this session. Senate Bill 73 from state Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound, provides for the creation of an adult stem cell research program. The legislation does not specifically address embryonic stem cell research, which scientists say holds the most promise for finding treatments for serious medical conditions such as Parkinson’s disease, diabetes and cancer. TFN is appreciative of Sen. Nelson’s efforts to promote this important medical research.
On the other hand, as originally filed, the legislation would restrict facilities built with funds from the program to research involving only adult stem cells. TFN activists joined with those from Texans for the Adancement of Medical Research to ask Sen. Nelson to remove that provision from the bill. Keep an eye on TFN Insider for more news on Sen. Nelson’s bill.
ICR officials, charging that they were the victims of “viewpoint discrimination,” have said they will seek help from the courts to overturn the coordinating board’s decision. Now they are also looking for help in the Texas Legislature.
This is the clearest case yet of anti-evolution extremists putting political partisanship ahead of giving Texas kids a sound science education. Now the State Republican Executive Committee (SREC) is pressuring Republicans on the Texas State Board of Education to require that public school students learn phony ”weaknesses” of evolution in their science classrooms.
The committee passed a resolution on March 7 insisting that Republican board members bow to the Texas GOP platform on the issue. The platform, passed at the GOP state convention in June 2008, includes the following plank:
The letter builds a compelling case for “truth telling” in sexuality education:
People of faith must speak out for comprehensive sexuality education. We know that there are people of good faith who differ with us on what young people need. We seek to reach out to those from whom we may be divided to seek what is best for our nation’s youth. We all must be truth seeking, courageous, and just in our efforts to provide all young people with the sexuality education they so urgently need.
UPDATE: Don’t just stew in frustration. Do something about it. -
As we have battled anti-evolution extremists on the Texas State Board of Education over the past year, we knew that a legislative assault on science was inevitable. On Friday, the last day for filing legislation at the Texas Capitol, a far-right lawmaker from East Texas filed the bill we’ve been expecting.
House Bill 4224 by state Rep. Wayne Christian, R-Center, is a full frontal assault on science education in Texas. The bill would open the door to teaching public school students almost any cockamamie concept that any crackpot wants to portray as “science,” regardless of what mainstream scientists and school administrators have to say about it.
Scientists are “atheists.” Parents who want to teach their children about evolution are “monsters.” Pastors who support sound science are “morons.”
Is that the sort of message Chairman Don McLeroy and his cohorts on the State Board of Education have in mind for Texas science classrooms if they succeed in their campaign to shoehorn “weaknesses” of evolution back into the science curriculum standards? That’s certainly the message of a new book McLeroy is now endorsing.
In critiquing the National Academy of Science’s (NAS) missionary evolution tract—Science, Evolution and Creationism, 2008, he identifies their theft of true science by their intentional neglect of other valid scientific possibilities. Then, using NAS’s own statements, he demonstrates that the great “process” of evolution—natural selection—is nothing more than a figure of speech. These chapters alone are worth the reading of this book.
Curious to know what Johnson envisions – and McLeroy endorses – as a proper science education? You can read the full tome for yourself online. Or if you don’t have the time (or the stomach) to explore the full treatise, we have compiled a few choice selections that give you the flavor. Remember, this could well be coming soon to a public school science class near you if evolution opponents on the state board get their way next week. Read more after the jump…
As we get closer to the final vote at the Texas State Board of Education on science standards next week, creationists on the board are showing their real stripes. First it was board chairman Don McLeroy, who endorsed a book equating acceptance of evolution with atheism – making clear that his primary beef with evolution is based on religious beliefs (despite repeated claims to the contrary). And now Terri Leo, R-Spring, gets in on the act.
The first cat Leo let’s out of the bag is the ”end game” for creationists on the board: biology textbooks. What the next generation of textbooks teach about evolution is the subtext for the entire debate on curriculum standards. Leo and her allies lacked the votes in 2003 to force publishers to include phony “weaknesses” of evolution, but now the elusive majority is in sight. Leo is blunt:
In a series of essays published at www.solvinglight.com/blog/, author Robert Bowie Johnson Jr. presents evidence that Barack Obama is directly linked to Satanic teachings through his close association with Oprah Winfrey, who parrots and relentlessly promotes, worldwide, the anti-Christian doctrine of her guru, Eckhart Tolle.
“The voting public has a right to know to what degree Barack Obama, who has called himself a ‘committed Christian,’ considers himself and his wife to be integral parts of Oprah’s and Tolle’s New Age global tribe, a tribe that has adopted the “wisdom” of the ancient serpent as its own,” Mr. Johnson said.
You can read the full release here. We wonder: does Chairman McLeroy also think President Obama is under the influence of Satanic teachings? Inquiring minds want to know.
(Fort Worth Star-Telegram writer Bud Kennedy mentions Johnson’s Satan-Obama accusation in a column today.)
After more than a year of work and often bitter debate, the State Board of Education is set this week to decide what the next generation of Texas students will learn in their public school science classrooms. Media outlets across the country (including the New York Times here and here, the Wall Street Journal today and even FOX News) have focused attention on the important battle over what the state’s new science curriculum standards should require schools to teach about evolution.
Beginning with the public hearing at noon on Wednesday, we will be live-blogging the debate for three days. So you will be able to keep up with the action here. A preliminary vote is scheduled for Thursday, with a final vote coming Friday. (We also encourage you to subscribe to TFN News Clips, a daily e-mail digest of news articles about the religious right and TFN issues.)
As the Texas State Board of Education nears a final vote on new public school science curriculum standards, board chairman Don McLeroy, R-Bryan, is arguing once again that science classes should include supernatural explanations. In a new op-ed from the Austin American-Statesman, McLeroy — a creationist who believes Earth is less than 10,000 years old — writes that the proposed science standards up for a final vote this week include a definition of science that he likes:
Newspapers both inside Texas are focusing attention on this week’s showdown over science education in Texas. The San Antonio Express-News, for example, offers dueling op-eds here and here. The Dallas Morning News does the same here and here.
It’s disturbing enough that the Texas board of education might seek to impose its religious views on public school students in that sizable state. It’s even more alarming that the Lone Star State’s textbook market is so large that many publishers write books to meet its standards and then sell them across the country. The Texas State Board of Education must hold firm to its decision to strip the “strengths and weaknesses” language from the state’s science standard. Texans, like everyone else, are free to believe what they want, but in science class, they should teach science.
12:25 – Our press conference ran long, and we were late getting into the hearing. Unfortunately, State Board of Education Chairman Don McLeroy has rejected a request for a table for us in the board room (as at the last two board meetings). We’re told that’s “too distracting” for board members, although we set up in a far back corner. Frankly, the issue is more likely one of not liking what we’ve been blogging about at past meetings. In any case, we’re here, we’re blogging, get used to it. (We’re so witty.)
12:33 – The board room is overflowing with folks. The creationists are out in force this time, but we still have lots of science supporters (wearing our signature green).
12:37 – A testifier who has worked in the textbook industry is warning the board that what is decided about science in Texas will be taught throughout the country. Indeed.
12:58 – Terri Leo is complaining because two people in a row have testified against “strengths and weaknesses.” She points out witnesses should be alternating, for and against. For Pete’s sake.
1:01 – A scientist is correctly pointing out that “strengths and weaknesses” is being used as a wedge to promote ideological arguments in science classrooms.
1:07 – Now we have a testifier arguing that the board should broaden the definition of science so that it can’t “keep the creationists out.” It really couldn’t be clearer what the agenda is here. Creationism simply science. It’s faith. Public schools have no business deciding whose religious beliefs to teach in science classrooms.
1:10 – Creationist pressure groups are bringing in their big guns. Coming up is Raymond G. Bohlin, president of Richardson (Tex.)-based Probe Ministries. Bohlin is one of the most prominent supporters of “intelligent design”/creationism in the country. Why are the creationists still pretending that their attacks on evolution have nothing to do with trying to promote creationism in science classrooms? The folks testifying for them are revealing that claim to be nothing but a charade.
1:21 – A member of the science curriculum writing teams notes that amendments creationists added to the standards in January are opposed by a team members. Board member Barbara Cargill notes that she got help from the board’s “science experts” in drafting her amendments. Want to guess who? Couldn’t be Stephen Meyer from the anti-evolution Discovery Institute, could it?
1:24 – And now Raymond Bohlin is testifying, arguing about “the limits of biological change.” “You get just so far, and you can’t push it farther.” He argues that “there is no goal in natural selection,” as opposed to “artificial selection,” as when breeders try to eliminate problematic characteristics in something. We have a hard time following him, perhaps because he doesn’t have much time to develop his thought and get to his point. (But we can guess his point.)
1:28 – Terri Leo: Is knowledge of evolution so necessary for scientific research? Bohlin: Not in my research. (He has a doctorate in molecular and cell biology.)
1:32 - Oh, yeah. Bohlin has recently posted a commentary on the Probe Ministries Web site answering the perennial scientific question: “Is Masturbation A Sin?” (Do you really want to know the answer? More to the point, do you doubt what his answer is?) Perhaps he would like the board to add a curriculum standard requiring students to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of masturbation…
1:35 – A pro-science testifier: “Texas can’t afford to be thought of as an educational backwater.”
1:41 – It’s as if scientists have been talking to a brick wall for the past year. We’re still hearing arguments that “weaknesses” of evolution are plentiful in scientific literature. Yet Nobel laureates and other distinguished scientists have repeatedly shown that’s simply not the case. Are they all lying?
1:48 – A representative of the Austin Geological Society presents a letter calling on the board to support “honest and credible” science and is strongly supportive of teaching about evolution and in opposition to the “strengths and weaknesses” propaganda.
1:56 – TFN sent out the following press release after our 11:30 press conference before the board hearing.
AUSTIN – As the State Board of Education prepares for a decisive vote on science curriculum standards this week, nearly 60 international, national and state science organizations have signed statements opposed to dumbing down instruction on evolution in Texas public schools.
“What’s happening in Texas is clearly ringing alarm bells across the country,” said Lawrence Krauss, director of the Origins Institute and a professor in the School of Earth and Space Exploration at Arizona State University. “Most parents know that a sound science education will help their kids succeed in college and the jobs of the 21stcentury. The children of Texas deserve that, and the state shouldn’t have to deal with the legal challenges that are likely to result from the board promoting ideology over sound science.”
2:00 – We thought you might want to know a bit about the atmosphere here. The Texas Education Agency lobby was packed with science supporters when we arrived this morning. The litigators from anti-evolution Free Market Foundation Texas affiliate of Focus on the Family had already begun a press conference promoting the “strengths and weaknesses” propaganda. Following that, TFN started its press conference with educators and scientists. We’ve rarely seen so many cameras for a press event at TEA, although it appears that some of the cameras (including ours) were from non-news organizations.
Both press conferences were disrupted by observers. In our case, one observer shouted “my grandfather wasn’t an ape,” or something to that effect. Another chose to pray loudly in an effort to drown out what our speakers were saying. An argument also marred the Focus on the Family press conference.
It’s standing-room-only in the board room itself. In fact, many people are on the floor on the sides and in the back of the room. Numerous reporters — mostly television — are covering the hearing. A number of educators and scientists are in attendance, but it’s clear that creationist organizations — such as Focus and Probe Ministries — have been successful in bringing in evolution opponents.
The hearing is scheduled to go on to at least 6 p.m., but we expect it will stretch a bit beyond that. In any case, however, we don’t expect many people who signed up to speak will be able to do so. It looks like about 125 people have signed up to testify.
2:19 – Please excuse the commercial, but the truth is that we can’t keep up with this important work without the help of supporters of sound science. And the support we are receiving has been very heart-warming. Donations to TFN this week are up and, even better, are being doubled thanks to a Stand Up for Science matching grant from a generous donor. So every dollar gift we receive before Friday is worth two. If you can help: www.tfn.org/challengegrant. And whether or not you can donate, please know that your personal activism on this — by writing letters to the editor, contacting your elected officials, speaking out in support of sound science — is critical for ensuring that Texas kids get a 21st-century science education. Thanks so much for all of your support.
2:45 – The board is back from a break.
2:48 – An evolution opponent criticizes our argument that the board should be listening to science experts. “The people of this state have entrusted you” to make these decisions and not just listen to what the experts say. Actually, we’re fairly certain that Texans would feel more comfortable taking the advice of experts rather than the pseudoscientific arguments of ideologues.
2:51 – Board member Cynthia Dunbar characterizes listening to science experts as bowing to an “oligarchy.”
2:55 – Now creationists are attacking (once again) the TFN Education Fund’s survey of biology and biological anthropology faculty at Texas colleges and universities. The charge is that we have mischaracterized that study by claiming that the survey results apply to all scientists. Untrue. We clearly point out throughout, especially in the introduction (page 4) and the appendix on research methodology (page 17), who we surveyed — biologists and biological anthropologists. As before, we won’t be given an opportunity to respond to these unfounded charges. We’re not surprised.
3:04 – Good heavens. A testifier complains that she was never taught “weaknesses” of evolution in high school. Like what? She brings up “irreducible complexity,” pseudoscientific babble that has been soundly rejected by clear scientific evidence. It’s as if facts and research mean absolutely nothing.
3:35 – Dr. David Daniel presented excellent testimony on behalf of the the prestigious Academy of Medicine, Engineering and Science of Texas (TAMEST). TAMEST is made up of Texas Nobel Laureates and 200+ National Academy members, so you would think the board would listen carefully to what these guys have to say. And board chair Don McLeroy said he does listen to them — he just trusts his own scientific judgement:
“I read what you guys have to say. I just disgree with you.”
What does McLeroy disagree with? A letter TAMEST sent to the state board (unanimous supported by their Board of Directors) criticizing the board for looking to the pro-intelligent design Discovery Institute for expert advice, rather than listening to respected Texas scientists.
3:39 – Josh Rosenau from the National Center for Science Education is presenting letters and statements signed by representatives of nearly 60 international, national and state science organizations opposed to efforts to dumb down instruction on evolution. That’s a pretty large “oligarchy,” yes?
3:42 – Board member Terri Leo is complaining again that too many people in a row are testifying against “strengths and weaknesses.” “It’s not fair.”
3:47 – Josh: Removing “strengths and weaknesses” from the standards means publishers won’t have to invent “weaknesses” of evolution in order to get their textbooks adopted in Texas.
4:06 – Don McLeroy continues to question, as he has in previous hearings, whether understanding evolution is vital to the study of biology.
4:11 – A bright young man (a high school senior) notes that public opinion research shows support for the science of evolution in the United States is among the lowest for countries in the developed world. He then notes that U.S. achievement scores in science also rate very low. A connection?
4:16 – Kelly “www.christianattorney.com” Coghlan of Houston is up. Mr. Coghlan is the guy who helped saddle Texas with the so-called “Religious Viewpoints Anti-Discrimination Act” in 2007. That law requires schools to turn public events into “limited public forums” and essentially allow student speakers to then turn those events into opportunities to pray and evangelize to a captive audience.
4:19 – Taking “strengths and weaknesses” out of the standards will leave schools vulnerable to lawsuits. Really? Not teaching pseudoscience will lead to lawsuits? In what other states has this happened? We heard testimony earlier from the Casey Luskin at the Discovery Institute that no other state includes “strengths and weaknesses” in its standards right now. Are those states burdened with lawsuits from folks who want to teach “weaknesses” of evolution?
4:21 – Coghlan wants the standards to keep “strengths and weaknesses”: “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” Well, it is broken. The biology textbook adoption in 2003 is Exhibit A. And the board’s creationists have made it clear that they will try to hijack the 2011 biology textbook adoption.
4:23 – Terri Leo claims taking “strengths and weaknesses” out of the standards will lead to lawsuits over treating evolution differently. That’s absurd. All theories would be treated the same. Yet creationists in January passed amendments in January that single out evolution, something the board’s legal counsel warned them not to do. They have, in fact, laid the foundation for a lawsuit, but not the one they think.
4:26 – We think it’s funny that Coghlan blames the ACLU for making this issue so controversial. The ACLU is always the whipping boy for the religious right, even when the ACLU hasn’t done anything. (In fact, Terri Burke at ACLU of Texas testified in November on this issue, the only time we’ve seen ACLU involved. Yet.)
4:28 – Board member Cynthia Dunbar suggests that taking “strengths and weaknesses” out will mean only “strengths” of evolution will be taught, leading to lawsuits.
4:53 – Lots of conversations among board members between and during the testimony. We haven’t said much yet about the vote coming tomorrow and Friday. Essentially, we’re where we were in January — it will be very close. Chairman McLeroy and other board creationists have been circulating a list of amendments to the standards, nearly all targeting evolution. And they are certain to try again to force “strengths and weaknesses” back into the standards. We also expect efforts by pro-science board members to try to strip out anti-evolution amendments (particularly those challenging the concept of common descent) added in January.
5:18 – Board members are now being allowed to invite specific individuals to testify. It will be interesting to see who board members bring up.
5:25 – Board member Rick Agosto has invited Genie Scott of the National Center for Science Education to speak. That’s encouraging. Genie makes it clear what’s at stake. Putting “strengths and weaknesses” back in the standards will give evolution opponents ammunition to demand pseudoscience in the 2011 biology textbooks. Other states will likely rebel against such nonsense. Says Genie: You will have a Texas edition with junk science in it, and the rest of the country will have a different textbook with real science.
5:31 – Dave Welch of the Texas Pastor Council is now speaking. It’s unclear which board member invited him. Welch wants students to be taught challenges to evolution: “Sound science and academic demand full disclosure of this in order to make a sound decision.” Welch accuses opponents of “strengths and weaknesses” of censorship and claims there are scientifically valid “weaknesses” of evolution.
I assert that any so-called Christian and most emphatically any member of Christian clergy who embraces the deception of Darwinian evolution is no more a Christian than the chimpanzees from which he or she claims to have evolved.
5:38 – Another testifier (we missed the name) suggests that “fervent dogmatists” who support the science of evolution are “religious fundamentalists” themselves. (Update: We think this is a gentleman named Don Patton.)
5:45 – Patton says the fossil record is really just a bunch of clams: “Clams, clams and more clams.” His point, apparently, is that evolution is supported mostly by the fossil record and that the fossil record is insufficient.
5:50 – Prof. Gerald Skoog of Texas Tech is up. Prof. Skoog, who served as an “expert reviewer” of the curriculum standards, presents a letter supporting sound science (and opposing “strengths and weaknesses”) from the National Academy of Sciences.
5:54 – Hiram Sasser, director of litigation for the Free Market Foundation Focus on the Family Texas is up. He points to a letter from legislators supporting “strengths and weaknesses” and to polling showing that most American are skeptical of evolution
Well, yes. Most Americans are skeptical of a lot of things, but science isn’t decided by popular vote. Moreover, a lot of money has been poured into anti-evolution propaganda. Are we surprised by its effects on public opinion?
5:58 – Sasser suggests that taking “strengths and weaknesses” out of the standards is tantamount to totalitarianism and would put schools at legal risk for barring teachers and students from questioning evolution. This is rubbish.
The fact is, evolution is not subject to scientific questioning, as McLeroy suggests. If there are ways to present alternative views in a religion class – or, better yet, church – fine. But science class in a public school isn’t that place.
Even many people of faith accept the theory of evolution. Daniel Foster, a professor at the UT Southwestern Medical Center and an elder at the First Presbyterian Church of Dallas, exemplified this on yesterday’s Viewpoints page, urging the board to reject amendments that question evolution.
“No” votes to the anti-evolution parts of the standards are doubly important because what happens in Texas doesn’t stay here. Because the state has so many students, textbook publishers write to Texas standards and then sell their books to districts around the nation.
Doubting evolution shouldn’t be Texas’ legacy. More importantly, our students should not be subject to an erroneous line of teaching.
As we celebrate the 200th anniversary of Darwin’s birth, we await a third revolution that will see biology changed and strengthened. None of this should give succour to creationists, whose blinkered universe is doubtless already buzzing with the news that “New Scientist has announced Darwin was wrong”. Expect to find excerpts ripped out of context and presented as evidence that biologists are deserting the theory of evolution en masse. They are not.
Nor will the new work do anything to diminish the standing of Darwin himself. When it came to gravitation and the laws of motion, Isaac Newton didn’t see the whole picture either, but he remains one of science’s giants. In the same way, Darwin’s ideas will prove influential for decades to come.
6:47 – We told you earlier that dueling press conferences (for and against dumbing down instruction in evolution) were interrupted by observers, as happened with this woman:
“My grandfather was not a monkey!” one woman shouted at a crowd before the meeting began.
You can read more about today’s science debate in an Associated Press story that just hit the wire.
6:48 – Steven Schafersman of Texas Citizens for Science is up. He is taking the board to the woodshed for refusing to hear from science experts when considering amendments to the standards in January.
6:51 – Testimony has just ended. The board will begin debate on the standards tomorrow, likely around mid-morning. TFN Insider will be live-blogging the debate and keeping you updated on events here.
With the final public hearing behind them, Texas State Board of Education members today will debate public school science curriculum standards that will be in place for a decade. Board members will likely consider a slew of amendments creationists have been circulating. Many of those amendments specifically target evolution, and almost certainly at least one will again call for requiring students to learn “strengths and weaknesses” of scientific theories (but it’s always about evolution).
9:17 – The Texas State Board of Education meeting has begun, and we have some encouraging news. Dallas member Mavis Knight, a strong supporter of sound science standards, is participating by videoconference. It appears that Mary Helen Berlanga from Corpus Christi is not present, but no motion can pass on a 7-7 tie. So if all votes hold from January, the pro-science board members should be able to block bad amendments today. (We said “if” and “should be able.”)
The board has not yet reached the agenda item on science standards.
9:24 – A representative of the right-wing Texas Public Policy Foundation is talking to the board about early revisions of the social studies standards, which the board will take up after science. We’re waiting for a copy of the document the representative is presenting to the board.
9:40 – Board member Terri Leo decries any suggestion to leave out of the social studies standards important historical figures to make room for “multicultural” issues and personalities. “I’ve never heard of half of these people,” Leo says of one proposed list of names. Well, we haven’t seen the list of proposed names or those who might be left out, and everyone agrees that key historical figures should be covered in social studies classrooms. But that Ms. Leo has never heard of someone in history is hardly a sound criterion the state should be following for deciding who gets in and who gets left out of standards.
9:53 – Board member Cynthia Dunbar is suggesting that the board should perhaps start the social studies process over. Let’s recap: board members have appointed members to social studies writing teams, who have already met once. The board has received one report on their work, from the Texas Public Policy Foundation. The teams have not finished their work. In fact, a representative of the Texas Education Agency has informed the board that writing teams were still very early in the revision process. Ms. Dunbar, however, is concerned that the writing teams will present drafts based on “entrenched” interests (“academia,” she says), not parents and others. (Are many teachers not parents?) Chairman Don McLeroy wants to cancel the social studies revision process at this point and then come up with a new proposal for how to proceed.
10:01 – It appears the board will defer a decision until tomorrow on how to proceed on social studies standards.
10:03 – By the way, we now have the document presented by Brooke Dollens Terry of Texas Public Policy Foundation. Following are the names she says have been added to the standards for third grade. (Terri Leo says she has never heard of half of the names being added, but it’s unclear if she means for all the standards or just for third grade.)
Grace Hopper, Margaret Knight, Quanah Parker, Dr. Hector P. Garcia, Maya Lin, Maya Angelou, Sandra Cisneros, Kadir Nelson, Jean Pinkey, Angela Shelf Medear, Elisabet Ney, Carmen Lomas Garza, and Bill Martin.
10:07 – The board is about to begin its debate on science.
10:09 – Board member Ken Mercer of San Antonio moves to add “strengths and weaknesses” back into the science standards.
10:12 – Mercer: This about allowing students to discuss and question strengths and weaknesses of all scientific theories. He claims receiving 15,0000-16,000 e-mails on this from around the state.
10:15 – Mercer goes down the “microevolution” vs. “macroevolution” path again. And he brings up “Piltdown man” and a list of other “weaknesses” he claims plague evolutionary theory.
10:19 – OK, it looks like board member David Bradley’s computer screen has TFN Insider up. Good morning, Mr. Bradley!
10:20 – Member Bob Craig of Lubbock offers a substitute amendment. “I am fully cognizant to the difference between faith and science. But I believe they can co-exist.” He argues that what the writing teams suggested in December still allows students to freely discuss all aspects of science. Mr. Craig proposes to keep the work group language (without “strengths and weaknesses”) but adds “including discussing what is not fully understood so as to encourage critical thinking by the student.”
10:26 – Dallas member Geraldine “Tincy” Miller supports Mr. Craig’s motion.
10:30 – This should be interesting. Mr. Mercer and other creationists have argued that taking “strengths and weaknesses” out of the standards will bar students from discussing and asking questions. Mr. Craig’s amendment addresses that, explicitly affirms the right of students to discuss and question while keeping phony “weaknesses” out of textbooks.
10:32 – Mavis Knight speaks in favor of Mr. Craig’s motion.
10:34 – The creationists have a difficult decision to make here. Is this about the freedom of students to ask questions, as they have argued, or is this about promoting phony attacks on evolution in textbooks?
10:36 – Pat Hardy speaks in favor of Mr. Craig’s motion.
10:37 – Terri Leo opposes Mr. Craig’s motion. She says the language is “too ambiguous.” She wants teachers to tell students specific “weaknesses.”
10:38 – Lawrence Allen supports Mr. Craig’s motion.
10:39 – By the way, Texas Freedom Network supports Mr. Craig’s motion (although we hadn’t seen it until now). It’s a wise and responsible way to ensure that students are free to ask questions. That’s how they learn.
10:41 – Cynthia Dunbar opposes Mr. Craig’s motion. She notes a comment from Ms. Miller that she (Ms. Miller) is a committed Christian. Ms. Dunbar says that religious beliefs are irrelevant to what the board should so. Oh, really? Then why have her creationist colleagues and their allies questioned the faith of those who oppose putting “strengths and weaknesses” in the standards.
10:43 – Rick Agosto opposes Mr. Craig’s amendment. “If it’s not ‘fully understood,’ then I don’t consider that science.”
10:44 – Once again, Mr. Craig has moved that the board retain the language proposed by writing teams in December (without “strengths and weaknesses”) but add to the expectation that students analyze and evaluate scientific explanations: “including discussing what is not fully understood so as to encourage critical thinking by the student.”
10:46 – Barbara Cargill opposes Mr. Craig’s motion. She says “strengths and weaknesses” language protects the ability of teachers to tell students “weaknesses” of evolution (however phony those “weaknesses” are, apparently). “Darwinists have tried to smother all the challenges … (and) weaknesses of evolution.”
10:52 – Mr. Mercer opposes Mr. Craig’s motion. “What are they afraid of? Why all this national attention over one word, ‘weaknesses’?”
10:54 – McLeroy calls a 10-minute recess.
11:08 – They’re back. Ms. Knight moves to change Mr. Craig’s amendment to read: “fully understand IN ALL FIELD OF SCIENCE.” So the wording would be: “including discussing what is not fully understood in all fields of science.” The board accepts that change without objection. We’re back to Mr. Craig’s motion.
11:12 – Mr. Craig’s motion fails 6-8. We’re back to Mr. Mercer’s original amendment adding back “strengths and weaknesses.”
11:13 – Mr. Mercer’s motion fails 7-7!!!
11;15 – This is huge victory for sound science education in Texas. Moreover, the creationists’ opposition to Mr. Craig’s motion exposed their hypocrisy about wanting to ensure that students can ask questions about science.
BREAKING NEWS: A proposed amendment adding “strengths and weaknesses” of scientific theories back to the science standards has failed on a 7-7 vote.
11:17 – With the defeat of “strengths and weaknesses,” the board is now on to other amendments. Ms. Cargill begins.
11:20 Despite Chairman McLeroy’s repeated prohibition against signs in the hearing room (targeted at TFN members quietly holding signs saying things like “Stand Up for Science”), creationists who wanted “strengths and weaknesses” in the standards have brought a couple of bright neon signs to the hearing room today reading:
“Don’t Censor Science”
and
“No Science Censorship”
Finally, Mr. Agosto requested that Chairman McLeroy ask the creationists to withdraw their signs. He did.
11:28 – Here is the vote breakdown on the Mercer “strengths and weaknesses” amendment:
Yes: Bradley, Cargill, Dunbar, Lowe, McLeroy, Mercer, Leo
Berlanga is absent today. We are told she will be able to participate tomorrow by videoconference.
This is a huge victory for sound science, but not the final word. The final vote will be taken on Friday. And board members may now offer additional amendments to the standards, so there is still room for mischeif by anti-evolution board members. So Act 1 is over with a victory for science advocates. Stay tuned as Act 2 begins.
11: 32 – Ms. Cargill’s amendments right now appear to be mostly small changes to some elementary science classes. Nothing on evolution yet.
12:02 – We’re still here. Ms. Cargill continues to offer amendments to elementary-level science classes. For the most part, these are fine and are bringing no objections from board members. Anti-evolution amendments are still to come.
12:12 – The board is now moving on to amendments for standards for courses in secondary schools.
12:13 – Gail Lowe offers amendments that would apply to all high school courses. We’re checking them now. Update: So far, these look OK.
1:43 – Sometimes the hypocrisy is really astounding. The anti-evolution Discovery Institute is harshly criticizing State Board of Education member Rick Agosto for asking that creationists remove their anti-evolution signs from the board room. Says the Disco:
Apparently Texas Board of Education member Rick Agosto isn’t just content to censor science by removing any criticisms of evolution from the science curriculum. The San Antonio Democrat even wants to prevent citizens from expressing their disagreement with that censorship. This morning Agosto demanded that some citizens quietly holding signs stating “Don’t Censor Science” at the Board meeting take down their signs. He even called on security personnel to forcibly remove the signs, but Board chair Don McElroy intervened to stop that abuse of power.
We saw no effort to have security personnel remove anybody from the board room. Mr. Agosto was simply asking Chairman McLeroy to enforce the rule that McLeroy decreed after pro-science citizens brought signs with them to the November hearing.
Does the Discovery Institute think rules are only for people who support sound science?
1:47 – Terri Leo offers a bad amendment to the biology standards:
Analyze and evaluate the evidence regarding formation of simple organic molecules and their organization into long complex molecules having information such as the DNA molecule for self-replicating life.
Mr. Agosto says he will vote for it but then discuss it with science experts later with an eye toward moving to strike it tomorrow if necessary. That’s just a bad parliamentary strategy. It’s harder to remove an amendment than to defeat it outright.
The amendment passes 8-6, with Agosto and Craig voting for it.
1:50 – Mavis Knight moves to strip out the January amendment from Don McLeroy questioning common ancestry.
1:57 – Chairman McLeroy argues against Knight’s amendment and criticizes those who say his January arguments for the original amendment were “dishonest” and “deceitful.”
1:59 – Knight’s amendment fails 7-6, with Agosto abstaining.
2:01 – McLeroy moves the following amendment to the biology standards:
Analyze and evaluate the sufficiency or insufficiency of natural selection to explain the complexity of the cell.
Let the pseudoscientific babble and distortions begin…
2:03 – McLeroy acknowledges that his January amendment was intended to attack what he describes as the first important principle of evolution, common ancestry. He says now he’s going after the second, natural selection. He wants schools to be “honest” with the kids.
2:04 – McLeroy defends his new amendment by reading passages from the work of Bruce Alberts, former president of the National Academy of Sciences. We don’t have Alberts’ work available here, but we highly (HIGHLY) doubt that he would be pleased to see McLeroy interpret his work as proof of a “weakness” of evolution.
2:16 – Wow. Now McLeroy wants to amend his amendment to read the “sufficiency or insufficiency of unguided natural processes to explain the complexity of the cell.”
That’s creationism, pure and simple. McLeroy has just called on the standards to pit science against God.
2:18 – McLeroy withdraws the amendment to his amendment. He goes back to his original proposal attacking natural selection. It passes 9-5, with Agosto and Nunez voting yes.
2:21 – The board moves on to amendments for chemistry.
2:22 – What we’re seeing is a combination of things. Some board members seem to be seeking some political cover. On the other hand, some may genuinely not be aware that they’re putting creationist nonsense in the science standards.
2:32 – Nothing big on chemistry. On to Earth and Space Science. Bob Craig offers five amendments. One would change a problematic amendment passed in January that suggested there are differing scientific theories about the origin of the universe. Another changes language in a January amendment attacking common descent.
2:39 – We’re hearing news from the Capitol that the House Public Education Committee has approved legislation that would put the State Board of Education under sunset review. Will provide more details when we get them.
2:43 – Mr. Craig’s amendment about the origins of the universe fails 6-8, with Agosto voting no.
2:45 – Update: We hear that the House Public Education Committee vote to put the state board under sunset review was unanimous.
2:48 – Mr. Craig’s amendments, by the way, have come from a majority of members of the Earth and Space Science curriculum writing team. Creationist board members, sometimes joined by one or two other members, are opposing them (even if the have absolutely nothing to do with evolution, origins or common descent.) None can pass anyway on a 7-7 tie.
2:54 – Mr. Craig’s amendment to change language in the January amendment challenging common descent fails 6-8, with Agosto voting no.
2:56 – Barbara Cargill now offers an amendment for Earth and Space Science designed to challenge the Big Bang theory. She wants teachers to tell students that there are different estimates of the age of the universe. (Like, maybe billions of years vs. 10,000?)
3:00 – Cargill says she has no intention to open the door to teaching creationist suggestions on the age of the universe. Uh huh. Right.
3:02 – Cargill slipped up a little while ago, saying “universal common design” instead of “universal common descent.” Oops. A revealing slip, yes?
3:05 – Cargill’s amendment passes 11-3.
3:09 – These and other Cargill amendments are designed to fudge science, making it more tentative on key points.
3:15 – Gail Lowe offers an amendment to the environmental systems course for high school. The current standard: “discuss the positive and negative influence of commonly held ethical beliefs on scientific practices such as methods used to increase food production or the existence of global warming.” Lowe wants to drop global warming. Mavis Knight suggests that students be asked to analyze and evaluate differing views on the existence of global warming. The revised amendment passes.
3:25 – The board has just voted to pass the amended standards on for consideration at the final board meeting tomorrow.
3:35 – We will be wrapping up this live-blogging now. We’ll be back for the final vote tomorrow.
OK, we’ve had a little time to digest all that went on today at the Texas State Board of Education. Without going through each of the many amendments that passed, here’s essentially what happened. This morning the board slammed the door on bringing creationism into classrooms through phony “weaknesses” arguments. But then board members turned around and threw open all the windows to pseudoscientific nonsense attacking core concepts like common descent and natural selection.
The amendments approved today are very problematic, regardless of the important victory over “strengths and weaknesses.” We anticipate that all 15 board members will be participating tomorrow, however, including a pro-science member who was absent today. So there is still time to reverse course.
Tomorrow, with the final vote, the board has a serious decision to make: is the science education of the next generation of Texas schoolchildren going to be based on fact-based, 21st-century science or on the personal beliefs of board members promoting phony arguments and pseudoscience?
You can still weigh in by sending e-mails to board members at sboeteks@tea.state.tx.us. Texas Education Agency staff will distribute e-mails to board members.
Watch this short clip of State Board of Education chairman Don McLeroy explaining the true motivation behind his two amendments to proposed Texas science standards dealing with common descent and natural selection:
We’ll say this for McLeroy – he’s not trying to hide his intent. The purpose of his amendments is to cause kids to question the validity of the “two key parts of the great claim of evolution, which is common ancestry by unguided natural processes.” McLeroy - and by extension those who voted to support this amendment – want to convince students that evolution is not true.
And can we ask, if the natural process is not “unguided,” then who is guiding it?
9:00 – Today the Texas State Board of Education finally decides what the next generation of Texas students will learn about evolution in their public school science classrooms. The morning preliminaries are ceremonial, but we expect debate on the science curriculum standards to begin within the hour. Stay tuned.
9:48 – The science debate is beginning.
9:50 – Cynthia Dunbar moves to amend the standards to ask students to study evidence “supportive and nonsupportive” of scientific theories. This is just another way of saying “strengths and weaknesses.”
10:05 – The board is on break as members discuss the amendment with each other.
10:08 – They’re back. Dunbar brings up the old nonsense that she’s protecting “academic freedom” and the state from being sued. She argues that if folks think “strengths and weaknesses” is “tainted,” then “supportive and nonsupportive evidence” should be fine. She misses the point. There is NO scientific evidence nonsupportive of evolution. Evolution is settled science for all but ideologues who oppose it for religious reasons.
10:14 – Bob Craig offers an amendment to the amendment, striking “supportive and nonsupportive” and replacing it with scientific evidence “on all sides” of the issue.
10:22 – One wonders if this board would also agree that students should learn “supportive and nonsupportive” evidence that Earth revolves around the sun. Or maybe we can have teachers present all sides to that debate. www.fixedearth.com can provide the side that says it doesn’t.
10:25 – Craig’s amendment: “analyze, evaluate and critique scientific explanations in all fields of science by using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and experimental and observational testing, by examining both scientific evidence that is supportive and not supportive of those explanations, so as to encourage critical thinking by the student.”
10:34 – Strike that. The above was Dunbar’s original amendment. This is Craig’s substitute: “analyze, evaluate and critique scientific explanations in all fields of science by using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and experimental and observational testing, including examining all sides of scientific evidence of those scientific explanations so as to encourage critical thinking by the student.”
10:37 – Craig’s amendment will pass, it appears.
10:44 – Mary Helen Berlanga says she will oppose both Craig’s and Dunbar’s amendment because she wants to stick with the draft from the teacher and expert writing teams.
10:55 – Another extended break is ending.
11:00 – The amendment is changed to move “in all fields of science” to the beginning of the standard.
11:07 – This is the amendment: “In all fields of science, analyze, evaluate and critique scientific explanations by using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and experimental and observational testing, including examining all sides of scientific evidence of those scientific explanations so as to encourage critical thinking by the student.” The amendment passes 13-2, with Berlanga and Rene Nunez voting no.
11:10 – The board moves on to amendments at other grade levels.
11:14 – The amendment with “on all sides” applies to all science classes in third grade and up.
11:58 – Board members have moved off of evolution over the past hour, but we expect them to bring up amendments after an extended break.
12:32 – Members are now going to hear amendments attempting to strip out anti-science amendments adopted by the board yesterday and in January. Lawrence Allen offers an amendment striking chairman Don McLeroy’s measure challenging common descent in the biology standards.
12:36 – McLeroy is opposed. “If I knew I had to debate this again today, I would have brought all my evidence.” The fossil record, he says, doesn’t support common ancestry.
12:40 McLeroy: “People say I’m talking out of context when I speak about stasis.”
Well, yes, he is.
12:41: McLeroy: “I disagree with all these experts. Somebody has to stand up to these experts. I don’t know why they’re doing it.”
12:42: Stay tuned for our video clip on this strange lecture as soon as we have it ready.
12:42: McLeroy: The fossil record both supports and doesn’t support evolution. Let the students decide, he says.
12:43: Cynthia Dunbar: Striking McLeroy’s amendment will be OK because the new “compromise amendment” adopted earlier will allow these kinds of arguments. But then she says she opposes the motion to strike it. Very confusing.
12:45 – Barbara Cargill opposes Allen’s amendment striking the McLeroy measure. “Why is it that some things do stay the same over time?” She buys McLeroy’s “stasis” argument.
12:47 – Geraldine Miller: Supports Allen’s amendment. McLeroy’s amendment “basically doesn’t make any sense.”
12:49 – David Bradley opposes Allen’s amendment. Knight supports it. Bob Craig supports it. Craig: McLeroy’s measure conflicts with the compromise adopted earlier. Agosto gave a confusing statement, so it’s hard to know but we think he supports Allen’s amendment. Mercer opposes Allen’s amendment. Berlanga: Supports Allen’s amendment. “When we need legal assistance, we go to an attorney…. When we know any assistance, we go to the experts in the field. I’m not a scientist.” She argues to listen to the science experts.
12:58 – Mercer: “The issue of sudden appearance in the fossil record is important.”
12:59 – McLeroy: Mocks the argument that who is he, a dentist, to challenge scientists. He criticizes “the appeal to authority” as an argument against his position. “They are the experts, but science doesn’t operate on consensus.” But now he appeals to authority by quote-mining Stephen J. Gould.
1:03 – McLeroy: “Genetics is the foundation for modern biology, not evolution.” “Genetics goes back to a Christian monk who did precise data.” Huh?
1:06 – Allen’s amendment passes 8-7, striking McLeroy’s challenge to common descent in the standards. Very important victory.
1:08 – The board is taking a short break.
1:30 – Dunbar offers an amendment, calling for students to “analyze and evaluate the sufficiency of scientific explanations concerning any data on sudden appearance and stasis and the sequential groups in the fossil record.” Bob Craig wants to amend, striking “the sufficiency of.” Berlanga is bothered that the board is making recommendations on specific standards without allowing time for members to discuss the amendments with science experts. Very good question, of course.
1:43 – Terri Leo, acting as chair, says all this was debated yesterday, and the board doesn’t need anymore input from the science community. Of course, the board never asked science experts to advise the board about McLeroy’s measure in January or this week.
1:46 – Dunbar’s amendment, as amended by Craig, passes 13-2.
McLeroy is happy, which says it all. Creationists will now pressure publishers to challenge common ancestry in textbooks and base their challenges on McLeroy’s arguments.
1:49 – Allen moves to strip out McLeroy’s amendment, passed yesterday, challenging natural selection.
1:54 – This amendment passes 8-7.
1:59 – Craig offers an amendment: “Analyze and evaluate scientific explanations concerning the complexity of the cell.” This amendment passes 13-2.
2:03 – Allen moves to strike a Terri Leo amendment passed yesterday that stated: “Analyze and evaluate the evidence regarding formation of simple organic molecules and their organization into long complex molecules having information such as the DNA molecule for self-replicating life.” The motion fails 5-10.
4:19 – Apologies for the long gap since the last post. We’ve been working with reporters for the last two hours. In addition to the amendments on the biology standards, board members also considered a measure to remove suggestions from the Earth and Space Science standards that there are competing scientific theories (besides Big Bang) on the origins of the universe. That amendment failed. The board then moved to adopt the full science standards document on a 13-2 vote.
The Texas Freedom Network has released the following statement on the final adoption of science curriculum standards by the State Board of Education today:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 27, 2009
TFN President Kathy Miller: Texas State Board of Education Adopts Flawed Science Standards
The word “weaknesses” no longer appears in the science standards. But the document still has plenty of potential footholds for creationist attacks on evolution to make their way into Texas classrooms.
Through a series of contradictory and convoluted amendments, the board crafted a road map that creationists will use to pressure publishers into putting phony arguments attacking established science into textbooks.
We appreciate that the politicians on the board seek compromise, but don’t agree that compromises can be made on established mainstream science or on honest education policy.
What’s truly unfortunate is that we now have to revisit this entire debate in two years when new science textbooks are adopted. Perhaps the Texas legislature can do something to prevent that.
###
The Texas Freedom Network is a nonpartisan, grassroots organization of religious and community leaders who advance a mainstream agenda supporting public education, religious freedom and individual liberties.
“I disagree with these experts. Somebody’s gotta stand up to experts that are… I don’t know why they’re doing it. They’re wonderful people.”
During today’s Texas State Board of Education debate over new public school science standards, board chairman Don McLeroy defended a measure challenging evolution and the concept of common descent specifically. Here’s the video clip:
Board members voted to strip from the standards a McLeroy measure that would have required science teachers to challenge specifically the concept of common descent. They then turned around and passed what they called a compromise amendment that does the same thing but with different language: “analyze and evaluate scientific explanations concerning any data on sudden appearance and stasis and the sequential groups in the fossil record.” McLeroy had argued that such data disproves the concept of common descent and will demand that publishers say as much in new textbooks are adopted in 2011. He was later heard gushing to reporters: “Science has regained its luster.”
The Texas State Board of Education did more than open the door to creationist attacks on evolution when passing new science curriculum standards today. It also watered down a section on global warming in the standards for the environmental systems high school course.
The environmental systems curriculum standards drafted by a writing team in December had included the following standard:
(9)(G) discuss the positive and negative influence of commonly held ethical beliefs on scientific practices such as methods used to increase food production or the existence of global warming
The measure was changed to read: “analyze how ethical beliefs can be used to influence scientific practices such as methods of increasing food production.” Then the board added the following standard: “Analyze and evaluate different views on the existence of global warming.” As with evolution, there is consensus in the mainstream science community on the existence of global warming. The debate revolves around the mechanisms causing it.
As we noted yesterday, evolution wasn’t the only target of social conservatives on the Texas State Board of Education this week. New public school science curriculum standards approved by the board also weaken instruction on climate change.
Board Chairman Don McLeroy told a reporter that he thinks the standards, including a measure suggesting there is no scientific consensus on global warming, “perfectly good”:
Conservatives like me think the evidence (for human contributions to global warming) is a bunch of hooey.
Changes in the atmosphere, the oceans and glaciers and ice caps now show unequivocally that the world is warming due to human activities, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said in new report released today in Paris.
The IPCC, which brings together the world’s leading climate scientists and experts, concluded that major advances in climate modelling and the collection and analysis of data now give scientists “very high confidence” – at least a 9 out of 10 chance of being correct – in their understanding of how human activities are causing the world to warm. This level of confidence is much greater than the IPCC indicated in their last report in 2001.
Climate change isn’t one of the issues the Texas Freedom Network follows closely. But Chairman McLeroy’s comment reveals precisely the problem we are working to overcome: ideologues trying to promote personal and political agendas over honest science, research and facts in public school classrooms.
A bill aimed at undercutting acceptance of evolution in Florida science classes, which kicked up a fuss but didn’t pass in the Florida Legislature last year, apparently is going nowhere this year.
A Senate version of the bill has yet to receive a committee hearing and has no companion bill in the House.
That means, said one proponent of the idea, that the bill has little chance of passage in this frantic session, heavily devoted to cutting and balancing the state budget.
“With no companion in the House, it doesn’t have much likelihood,” said Rep. Alan Hays, R-Umatilla.
In the crush of the last couple of days, we didn’t have time until now to read through this essay by evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne at the University of Chicago about the debate over evolution and science in Texas public schools. Prof. Coyne wonders just how far to take the “strengths and weaknesses” (or the “teach all sides”) debate over evolution:
What’s next? Since there are many who deny the Holocaust, can we expect legislation requiring history classes to discuss the “strengths and weaknesses” of the idea that Nazis persecuted Jews? Should we teach our children astrology in their psychology classes as an alternative theory of human behaviour? And, given the number of shamans in the world, shouldn’t their views be represented in medical schools?
The Texas Legislature should “take a thorough look” at changing the structure of the embattled Texas State Board of Education, maybe changing it to a nonpartisan or appointed board, Texas House Speaker Joe Straus told the Star-Telegram Editorial Board Friday.
… Besides the board’s handling of science standards, Straus said, “I have some other concerns about that elected body having so much management authority over significant dollars,” referring to investments of the Permanent School Fund.
He said it would be “interesting” to look at nonpartisan board elections. Straus also brought up changing back to an appointed board.
“I’ve spoken to some people who were leaders in the effort to make it an elected board, and they’re very sorry,” he said.
Perhaps the anti-evolution pressure groups that led the attack on honest science in Texas think that no one was paying attention to their repulsive tactics. Well, we were.
In defense of her views, Mrs. Miller launched into a remarkable speech about how she is a Christian and “a student of the Bible,” as if her personal religious beliefs have any relevance to what should be taught in science classes. . . . Once again, a defender of evolution has appealed to religion rather than science to justify his or her views. Mrs. Miller is certainly entitled to her religious views, but she wasn’t elected to serve on a state board of theology. While the government has a legitimate secular interest in teaching the science of evolution, it has no right whatever to try to dictate students’ theological beliefs about evolution, pro or con. The fact that evolution defenders can’t stick to science when justifying their censorship of the science curriculum is telling.
Houston lawyer Kelly “www.christianattorney.com” Coghlan is burning up the Internets with another screed on the evolution battle in Texas public schools. (Coghlan was the author of another e-mail a few weeks back linking acceptance of the science of evolution to serial murderers like Jeffrey Dahmer.) He testified at least week’s Texas State Board of Education public hearing, darkly warning that the state would face lawsuits if the board eliminated a science curriculum requirement that students learn phony arguments attacking evolution. The board ultimately refused to retain the “strengths and weaknesses” requirement, but Coghlan is declaring victory anyway.
(T)he phrase was replaced with an even broader standard requiring teaching “all sides of scientific evidence” which implicitly includes teaching the scientific weaknesses. Some other issues were also voted on, and our side (pro-science) prevailed on most of these issues in close votes. The evolution lobby won the battle but lost the war.
There is no doubt, of course, that creationist pressure groups and their allies on the board will try to use the new language to force publishers to dumb down instruction on evolution. But what’s most interesting about Coghlan’s e-mail is the contempt with which he holds three Republicans who opposed “strengths and weaknesses” but supported the compromise that Coghlan now praises. He lists each of the three, asking for candidates to run against each in the next election:
We must elect people of integrity to the State Board. Over the next 2 years, this Board will decide which textbooks are used to teach our 4.7 million students. We don’t want to have to go through this same ordeal again. We must eliminate Board members who lack a moral compass on important issues such as these.
The lesson: political compromises with extremists earn you little but future troubles. The world of extremists is black and white. If they can’t get their way completely, they will squeeze everything out of you they can get and then push you over the political cliff. Talk about “lacking a moral compass.”
Texas has the nation’s third-highest teen birth rate yet receives more federal abstinence-only funding than any other state in the country. What’s wrong with this picture?
We just finished a briefing for Capitol reporters about two very important bills under consideration by the Texas House Public Education Committee this afternoon. House Bill 741 by Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-San Antonio, would require that Texas public schools teach comprehensive, “abstinence-plus,” sex education. HB 1567 by Rep. Michael Villarreal, D-San Antonio, would require that all information taught about condoms and other forms of contraception and disease prevention be medically accurate.
A Texas Freedom Network Education Fund report about sexuality education in public schools shows why these bills are so important. More than 9 in 10 Texas school districts teach nothing about responsible pregnancy and disease prevention, taking instead an abstinence-only approach. And most abstinence-only programs are plagued with errors and misinformation and rely on fear, shame and stereotypes to teach teens about sexuality and health. Moreover, public polling shows that support for comprehensive sexuality education is overwhelming.
So what’s the problem? Need you ask?
The abstinence-only pressure groups are out in force. Kyleen Wright of Texans for Life Coalition, for example, has been giving media interviews before her committee testimony. Wright helped lead successful efforts in 2004 to keep any medically accurate information about contraception and disease prevention out of new Texas high school health textbooks. Boiled down, Wright’s message is “ignorance works.” Well, no, it doesn’t. The state’s high teen birth rates are testament to that.
The Texas House Public Education Committee is about to take up two key bills that would bring important reforms to what the state’s public schools teach about sex education. Click here for a live video webcast of the hearing. (Then click on LiveStream 6 for the Public Education Committee meeting.) TFN Insider will also be providing updates.
6:00 - Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-San Antonio, is now laying out House Bill 741, which would require Texas public schools to teach comprehensive — or “abstinence-plus” — sexuality education if they teach about sexual health at all. Rep. Castro notes that Texas has the nation’s third-highest rate of teen births, a statistic that itself argues for major changes to the state’s predominantly abstinence-only approach to sexuality education. (Parents would still have the right to opt their children out of such classes.)
6:22 – Dr. Jan Realini, president of the Healthy Futures in San Antonio and member of the Texas Medical Association Council on Public Health, offers powerful testimony for arming teens with medically accurate information about how to protect themselves from pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.
6:44 – David Wiley, a professor of health education at Texas State University and co-author of the TFN Education Fund’s two-year study on sex education in Texas public schools, is now testifying. Prof. Wiley decries the “conspiracy of silence” surrounding sex education and calls for honest, medically accurate information in public schools.
7:08 – Social conservatives are testifying and are upset (of course) with the bill. They see no need to change the existing statute on sex education — regardless of soaring teen birth rates in Texas.
7:13 – State Rep. Randy Weber, R-Pearland, doesn’t much like the bill. “Do we teach safe smoking?” “Do we expect our kids to remain abstinent from drinking and driving?” We expected this kind of silliness.
7:15 – Kyleen Wright of Texans for Life Coalition claims abstinence-0nly is working and that teen birth rates are down. She fails to mention demographic changes over the last two decades that help account for that. In any case, they’re now rising — and Texas is already near the top. Wright: We are not for censoring information, but we want parents’ rights to be respected. “Parents have spoken loud and clear during their School Health Advisory Councils” that they want abstinence-only education. Moments ago, she noted that the TFN Education Fund report was accurate in noting that more than 94 percent of school districts teach abstinence-only. But now she refuses to acknowledge another key finding: those School Health Advisory Councils are a sham. They aren’t meeting and aren’t making recommendations. She also ignores public opinion polling that shows parents overwhelmingly support comprehensive, abstinence-plus education.
7:56 – OK, we’re betting this is the first time the words “anal intercourse” and “clitoris” have ever echoed off the walls of this hearing room. Just sayin’.
7:57 – A health education graduate student notes that too many undergraduates are simply ignorant about basic information regarding human sexuality, including anatomy.
7:58 – Members of the Texas Freedom Network’s Youth Leadership Council are lined up to testify this evening. These young people from Texas colleges and high schools are working to promote responsible sexuality education. We’re very proud of the courage and passion they bring to their activism on this critical issue.
8:34 – Abstinence-only program providers aren’t particularly happy with Rep. Castro’s bill either. Is it because the bill would require that their programs teach medically accurate information instead of exaggerating claims of contraceptive failure rates in an attempt to persuade students that condoms and other methods of preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases are virtually useless?
8:48 – Texas Freedom Network President Kathy Miller is now testifying in support of Rep. Castro’s bill. She’s walking committee members through some key findings from the TFN Education Fund report about what’s really happening in classrooms regarding sex education.
8:54 – Jonathan Saenz from the Free Market Foundation Focus on the Family-Texas is now testifying. Saenz says he has no problem with teaching medically accurate information on sex education. So should we expect him to support HB 1567 by Rep. Michael Villarreal, D-San Antonio? HB 1567 would require that information taught in public schools about condoms and contraception be medically accurate — a requirement that would force a lot of changes to many abstinence-only programs.
9:19 – The committee is about to hear testimony on Rep. Villarreal’s bill.
9:24 – This bill is just common sense. If schools are going to teach anything about contraception, shouldn’t the information be scientifically accurate? Of course. Yet efforts to pass such a measure in past legislative sessions have failed because social conservatives opposed them.
9:28 – TFN’s Kathy Miller testifies in support of the bill. She notes that the TFN Education Fund study found a high rate of factual errors in abstinence-only programs used in Texas public schools.
9:40 – Kelly Wilson, co-author of the TFN Education Fund report and an assistant professor of health education at Texas State University-San Marcos, is also testifying in support of Rep. Villarreal’s bill. She offers some examples of nonsense her study found being taught in sexuality education programs. (Example: sexually, men are like microwaves that heat up quickly, while women are like crockpots that take a while longer.)
9:45 – Kyleen Wright of Texans for Life Coalition is testifying against the bill. Is anyone surprised? So much for common sense. “First and foremost, I’m for parents’ rights.” Does she think any parents wants their kids taught medically inaccurate information?
9:49 – Wright: “You offend parents far less by giving less information than (by) giving (teens) more.”Good grief. We can’t remember a more absurd argument for keeping teens ignorant.
9:52 – Anyone doubt that in the next few days we’ll see over-the-top, hair-on-fire e-mails from far-right groups shrieking that some lawmakers want to expose children to all form of sexual perversion?
10:09 – Dr. Jan Realini (Healthy Futures) is testifying in favor of the bill. Dr. Realini is a physician working in public health and explains what she sees working with teens who are pregnant or who have sexually transmitted diseases. Too many, she says, have been kept ignorant of the medically accurate information they needed to protect themselves.
10:12 – Testimony on these sex ed reform bills is winding down. The committee will leave the bills pending.
Did you miss our live-blogging of the Texas House Public Education Committee hearing on reforming sexuality education in the state with the nation’s third-highest teen birth rate? Well, we offer this gem from Kyleen Wright of the Texans for Life Coalition, which insists on abstinence-only-until-marriage education in public schools:
9:49 – Wright: “You offend parents far less by giving less information than (by) giving (teens) more.”
Good grief. We can’t remember a more absurd argument for keeping teens ignorant.
From science to sex education and issues like private school vouchers, religious freedom and civil liberties, the Texas Freedom Network is engaged on numerous fronts in defending mainstream values against the religious right in Texas. We are fortunate to have the help of a dedicated band of student interns to help us here at the office, at the Capitol and at the State Board of Education. In addition to our regular internships, TFN also sponsors a “Legislative Academy” every two years for students interested in learning more about public policy advocacy and the legislative process. This year we have six hard-working, dedicated interns in our Lege Academy program. We thought you might like to hear from one about her experiences, Mary Tuma. Mary is a senior fellow in journalism at the University of Texas at Austin:
Now that the State Board of Education has adopted new science curriculum standards, publishers can write their textbooks for the Texas adoption in 2011. The state board’s creationists will use the flawed standards they approved as a weapon to force publishers into dumbing down instruction on evolution. To get a sense of some of the nonsense they will demand to see in the textbooks, check out board chairman Don McLeroy’s Web site.
Chairman McLeroy, who led the charge during the standards debate to weaken instruction on evolution, includes commentary about science and other topics on his Web site. Evolution, however, is a primary target there.
Proposed schemes for private school vouchers — which drain money from neighborhood public schools to pay for tuition at private and religious schools — have sparked heated battles in Texas legislative sessions since the 1990s. Tomorrow the Senate Education Committee will take up two key voucher bills.
Senate Bill 1301 by Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, would provide vouchers for students with autism and autism spectrum disorder. SB 183 by Sen. Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands, would create a broader voucher program for students with disabilities.
All Texas kids, regardless of their abilities or disabilities, deserve a quality education in Texas public schools. But voucher schemes aren’t the answer. Why? Among the reasons:
In a worldwide survey of 50 populations, a team of geneticists has identified many fingerprints of natural selection in the human genome. These are sites on the genome where specific sequences of DNA show signs of having become more common in the population, presumably because they helped their owners adapt to new climates, diseases or other factors.
The genetic regions where natural selection has acted turn out to differ in various populations, doubtless because each has been molded by different local forces on each continent.
“Our work supports the notion that regional populations have adapted in a variety of ways, some shared, some not, to the selective pressures they encountered as they dispersed from the ancestral African homeland some 80,000 years ago,” said Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the University of Chicago.
The authors of the new study are Dr. Pritchard and his colleagues Joseph Pickrell and Graham Coop. It was published online last month in Genome Research. It is the first to look for signals of selection in DNA samples gathered by the Human Genome Diversity Project.
We are grateful to TFN Insider visitors who say our blog has rapidly become an important news resource on issues ranging from science and science education to defending separation of church and state and religious freedom in Texas. So we were extra pleased to see Texas State Board of Education member David Bradley, R-Beaumont Buna, following along with TFN Insider at last month’s board debate over new public school science standards.
Check out Mr. Bradley’s computer screen. As a member of the board’s anti-science, creationist bloc, Mr. Bradley may not agree with the Texas Freedom Network on much, but he clearly knows where to go for good information.
Oh, good gravy. State Rep. Betty Brown, R-Terrell, is making national news for suggesting Asian voters in Texas take new names that are “easier for Americans to deal with.” At a Texas House committee hearing on a voter identification bill Wednesday, Brown told a representative of OCA, an organization for Asian Pacific Americans (here’s a link to the Houston chapter):
Rather than everyone here having to learn Chinese — I understand it’s a rather difficult language — do you think that it would behoove you and your citizens to adopt a name that we could deal with more readily here? … Can’t you see that this is something that would make it a lot easier for you and the people who are poll workers if you could adopt a name just for identification purposes that’s easier for Americans to deal with?
What good does it do to put a Chinese story in an English book? You learn all these Chinese words, OK. That’s not going to help you master … English. So you really don’t want Chinese books with a bunch of crazy Chinese words in them. Why should you take a child’s time trying to learn a word that they’ll never ever use again?
He then added that some words — such as chow mein — might be useful to know.
Our friends at NCSE have been wonderful national partners in the campaign for sound science education in Texas for many years, including during the adoption of new biology textbooks here six years ago. And they are continuing to battle efforts by creationist pressure groups to dumb down science education in states across the country. Check out the show.
As you know, lawmakers have filed a slew of bills that would rein in the authority of the Texas State Board of Education. Next week one of the most important bills will get a hearing in the Senate Education Committee.
Senate Bill 2275 by Sen. Kel Seliger, R-Amarillo, would strip the state board of authority over approving curriculum standards and textbooks (among other things). The bill would shift that authority to the state’s education commissioner. It also requires the commissioner to establish teams of educators and content experts to develop standards and review textbooks for approval.
Beck is also an admirer of James Dobson, who founded the religious-right group Focus on the Family. Beck brought Dobson on to his show a while back to talk about prayer in schools, declaring that some people “want to remove God from America entirely.” Across the bottom of the screen was a caption reading, “Progressives want to remove God from America.” (That surely must come as a shock to the tens of millions of people of faith in America whose political views are, in fact, progressive.)
We suppose having a sense of humor is important when elected officials are turning your state into a national laughingstock. Religion Dispatches offers a shocking photo of the rare “dog-cat” that Texas State Board of Education member Ken Mercer, R-San Antonio, must have been talking about during the recent debate over teaching about evolution. Mercer has argued that the absence of transitional animals like a “dog-cat” and a “cat-rat” is proof that evolution is a fraud. Humor aside, Lauri Lebo’s accompanying article is an excellent review of what happened in Texas. She even gets board Chairman Don McLeroy, R-Bryan, to once again argue that science should include supernatural explanations.
(M)y impression from reading about it is that it was not a step forward but rather a step backward. Of course, all science needs to be skeptical. It’s hard to be against skepticism. But when you get into the domain of promoting particular views about the basis for skepticism of evolution, and those views are not really valid, then I think we have a problem. I think we need to be giving our kids a modern education in biology, and the underpinning of modern biology is evolution. And countervailing views that are not really science, if they are taught at all, should be taught in some other part of the curriculum.
I can tell you there are people on the SBOE who vilify public education as the work of the devil. And I wonder how they can have a sincere interest in advancing the education of our school-age children with an attitude that public education is an evil entity. So I believe that this represents a very logical and tangible alternative to what we currently have.
The current session of the Texas Legislature has seen an unprecedented number of bills filed that would remove or otherwise rein in the authority of the embarrassment that the state board has become. The Senate Education Committee this morning heard testimony on one such bill – Senate Bill 2275 – that would remove the SBOE’s role in adopting textbooks and curriclum and transfer it to the state’s education commissioner. Sen. Kel Seliger, a Republican from Amarillo, authored the bill with two other Republican and one Democratic senator, clear evidence that exasperation with the state board crosses party lines.
The hearing this morning featured a parade of witnesses (including TFN President Kathy Miller) testifying to the state board’s unfair processes, divisive ideological history and outright ineptitude. The speakers represented diverse subject areas ranging from science to language arts to mathematics. Nearly all were critical of the highly-politicized, convoluted process of adopting curriculum and textbooks that had done damage to their respective disciplines.
But the most interesting comments at the hearing came from committee members themselves, most of whom seemed very receptive to the bill. Sen. Seliger was especially persuasive in responding to Republican Sen. Dan Patrick’s questions about the reasons for this bill, explaining in detail the failure of the current process to properly respect the work of teachers and subject-area experts. Then came a devastating indictment of the board from Republican Sen. Averitt that perfectly summarized the case against the board:
Every once in a while you’ll find an instance where an elected body is diverted from their prescribed mission, and the prescribed mission here is to provide the best educational materials to our school children. And I’ll tell you my experience with the State Board of Education has been nothing but the worst case or example of partisan bickering and fighting, Republicans and Democrats alike.
The full transcipt of Sen. Averitt’s speech in the Senate Education Committee appears after the jump.
The Texas House of Representatives today is taking up the state’s budget bill. Yesterday the Texas Freedom Network sent out the following Action Alert:
Upcoming House Budget Debate Will Include Critical Votes on Stem Cell Research and Vouchers
Two crucially important issues will be debated when the Texas House of Representatives takes up the state budget (SB 1) starting this Friday. Lawmakers need to hear from Texans like you encouraging them to do the right thing — and letting them know we are watching their vote on these issues. These could be the most important votes on these issues this session.
Please take a moment to call your own state representative, and ask her or him to:
- NO on all amendments to SB 1 that would ban funding for stem cell research in Texas.
- OPPOSE VOUCHERS by voting YES on any amendment that would prohibit the use of any state funds to pay private school tuition.
(Click hereto find contact information for your representative.)
And after you call, contactVal or Judiein our Outreach Office to let them know how your representative responded. This information is extremely helpful as we try to keep track of where House members stand on these issues.
Background information and simple talking points appear below to help you prepare for your call. This is our chance to slam the door on vouchers this session, as well as send a strong message that Texas will not close its doors to promising medical research that provides hope for so many.
Stem Cell Research
Background: The budget bill approved by the Senate last month included a rider banning public funding for embryonic stem cell research in Texas.
Why should lawmakers oppose adding this funding ban to the House budget bill?
- Controversial policies like this should be fully debated in stand-alone legislation — not attached to the state budget bill and passed without proper consideration.
- Experts believe embryonic stem cell research provides the most hope for those who suffer from many debilitating and incurable diseases.
- Supporting stem cell research is good for Texas, good for business and good for science. As a home to highly respected medical institutions like M.D. Anderson in Houston, Texas has long been a leader in innovative medical research and treatments. Stem cells offer a new frontier for Texas medical researchers.
- Already scientists are leaving Texas to work in states that are not hostile to this groundbreaking research.
Vouchers
Background: Two years ago, House members overwhelming voted to prohibit the use of state funds to pay private or religious school tuition (127-8). The same amendment has been proposed this year. A clear prohibition in the budget would end the possibility of any voucher schemes in the coming biennium.
Why should lawmakers vote for an amendment banning public funding for private school vouchers?
- Vouchers drain needed funds from our neighborhood public schools.
- Lawmakers should focus on properly funding and supporting public schools that educate all Texas kids.
The Texas House has just voted 122-22 to bar any public funding for private school voucher schemes in the next state budget. We just released the following statement from Texas Freedom Network President Kathy Miller:
“We saw schemes to drain money from public schools to pay for vouchers divide this Legislature for more than a decade. Just four years ago, the voucher lobby came within a handful of votes of passing such a scheme in the House. Now we’ve seen Texas House members overwhelmingly reject vouchers for two straight sessions, and we commend them for it.
The message is clear: vouchers are about as popular in Texas as a panicked skunk at a church picnic. Now our lawmakers should focus on providing the resources our neighborhood schools need to provide a quality public education for all Texas schoolchildren.”
The religious right in recent years has repeatedly argued that embryonic stem cell research isn’t sound science and has been a waste of time and money. Last week, for example, the Family Research Council once again argued that embryonic stem cell research “has not successfully treated a single person for any disease.” In testimony before Congress less than two years ago, David Barton of the Texas-based group WallBuilders also argued that such research hadn’t led to any cures. Just last month the Christian Coalition of America claimed that there have been “zero successes in human embryonic stem cell research.” Of course, politicians and far-right pressure groups in this country have put numerous obstacles in the way of this promising medical research.
British scientists have developed the world’s first stem cell therapy to cure the most common cause of blindness. Surgeons predict it will become a routine, one-hour procedure that will be generally available in six or seven years’ time. The treatment involves replacing a layer of degenerated cells with new ones created from embryonic stem cells.
This development offers new hope to millions of people who suffer from age-related macular degeneration.
Professor Peng Khaw, director of the Biomedical Research Centre at Moorfields and the UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, added: “This shows that stem cell therapy is coming of age. It offers great hope for many sufferers around the world who cannot be treated with conventional treatment.” He added: “All my patients say to me is, ‘When will this stem cell treatment be ready? I want it now’.”
On a related note, the Texas House passed its version of the state budget early Saturday (April 18) morning. The House budget does not include the Senate’s proposed ban on public funding for embryonic stem cell (ESC) research. (That ban could also prevent even privately funded ESC research at publicly funded facilities.) A House-Senate conference committee will now hammer out a compromise budget. Opponents of ESC research will likely work to put the funding ban in the final state budget.
The Dallas-based Institute for Creation Research Graduate School has filed its long-threatened lawsuit against Texas’ commissioner of higher education, Raymund Paredes, and the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. Last year the coordinating board rejected the ICR’s application to offer master’s of science education degrees in Texas. The board said the ICR — which argues that the concept of biblical creation is backed by science while evolution is not — failed to meet required academic standards. (Well, yeah.)
According to the complaint (available here), the ICR is charging that the coordinating board Dr. Paredes are working to
perpetrate viewpoint discrimination and censorship, inter alia, in violation of the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of the 14th Amendment (and in violation of other laws), especially as the 14th Amendment is recognized as applying to the constitutional rights of free speech (including academic speech and religious speech), freedom of the press (including freedom from “prior restraint” censorship of academic speech associated with freedom of the press), freedom from viewpoint discrimination (as well as content discrimination), free exercise of religion, freedom of association, freedom from hositility toward religious viewpoints), freedom from arbitrary and abusive governmental discrretion, freedom from anti-accommodational evolution-only-science enforcement policy practices, freedom from unequal protection (especially in academic “evolution-only-science-credentialing” politics that act like a government-controlled “titles of nobility” monopoly scheme in postsecondary Science Education), and reputation injuries, etc.
You can read the whole complaint for yourself, but here are some excerpts:
Texas State Board of Education member Barbara Cargill, R-The Woodlands, is crowing about the state’s new science standards in her April edition of The Cargill Connection (an e-mail newsletter). Ms. Cargill is thrilled that the standards require that students learn “all sides” of scientific evidence regarding evolution. She and other creationists on the board have made it clear they will use that standard to pressure publishers to include phony, long-discredited arguments against evolution in new science textbooks up for adoption in Texas in 2011.
Then Ms. Cargill notes a series of her amendments to the standards that the board approved:
I labored for months seeking input from science educators and experts before offering over twenty amendments for the elementary TEKS. All of these passed! Our young students will study the planets (they had been omitted), experiment with simple machines like pulleys, and make predictions using weather maps.
What?!? Those evil, liberal, education-establishment heathens! Why, they were even trying to HIDE THE EXISTENCE OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM’S PLANETS FROM OUR KIDS!
Good grief. Did Ms. Cargill honestly think students wouldn’t be learning about the planets in their science classrooms? Really? Yes, we can almost hear the publishers: “Teaching about the planets is just sooo boring. You’ve seen one, you’ve seen them all. A lot of them are just gassy blobs anyway. What else is there to say? So we figured science teachers wouldn’t notice or particularly care if we left them out of the textbooks.”
Thankfully, Ms. Cargill rode to the rescue. Of course, she also succeeded in eliminating from the standards the scientific consensus that the universe is nearly 14 billion years old. So kids will learn about the planets but better not ask how old they are.
It’s unusual for the Senate to reject a governor’s appointment. Even so, state lawmakers aren’t happy with a state board that has become increasingly dysfunctional (and embarrassing) since the Bryan dentist’s elevation to chairman. The board has disregarded established procedures, ignored state law, defied the Legislature and lurched from one “culture war” battle to the next. Most recently, of course, Chairman McLeroy led the board in opening the state’s science curriculum to creationist attacks on evolution, wildly declaring: “I disagree with all these experts! Somebody has to stand up to these experts!”
The Nominations Committee will meet 30 minutes after the Senate adjourns for the day on Wednesday. The hearing, which will include testimony on other nominations as well, will be in the Senate chamber at the Capitol. Those who want to testify can register at the hearing.
Want to share your opinion about Chairman McLeroy with the committee but can’t come to Austin to testify? Click here for the committee’s Web page. Then click on each member’s name for contact information.
It is obvious now that Texas Gov. Rick Perry is basing his hopes for re-election next year mostly on winning over the far-right wing of the Republican Party. (That’s the same wing that wrote the 2008 state party platform. You can read that classic example of extremism here.) If Gov. Perry can win the GOP nomination, he figures he’ll win the general election fairly easily in a Republican-leaning state.
So with an expected challenge for his party’s nomination from U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, the governor has raced to the extremist fringes. In addition to sharpening his attacks on reproductive rights for women, Gov. Perry has rejected federal aid for the unemployed, revived the racially poisoned “states rights” rhetoric of the segregationist right from the 1950s, and even suggested that Texas could and might one day secede. And this week he’s once again pow-wowing with fundamenalist pastors at a closed-door confab in Austin.
The Senate Nominations Committee considers the appointment of Don McLeroy as chairman of the Texas State Board of Education today, probably late this afternoon or early evening. Here are some questions we would love to see members of the committee ask Chairman McLeroy.
1. Please explain why you think, as you have been quoted saying, “scientific consensus means nothing.”
2. You have been quoted saying, “I disagree with all these experts. Somebody has to stand up to these experts.” Do you think you understand science better than scientists? Better than the Nobel laureates who addressed their concerns about the board’s action?
4. During the recent adoption of new science curriculum standards, why did you refuse to allow science experts to review and advise the full board about the wisdom (or lack thereof) of amendments that challenged the broad, mainstream scientific consensus on evolution, global warming and the age of the universe?
5. Do you think challenging established, mainstream science in Texas public school classrooms will help or hurt the ability of Texas to attract science-related industries that would bring high-paying jobs to this state? If not, why not? Will it help or hurt the ability of children to get admitted into and succeed in the nation’s best colleges and universities? If no, why not?
6. Why did you vote last year for a language arts standards document that your board allies patched together the night before the board’s final vote and then slipped under hotel room doors of other board members? Why did you vote to throw out nearly three years of work by teachers and education specialists?
We wonder what Chairman McLeroy’s answers to these questions might be. Do you? What questions would you like senators to ask?
The Senate Nominations Committee is considering Don McLeroy’s appointment as chairman of the Texas State Board of Education. Gov. Rick Perry appointed McLeroy as chairman in July 2007, after the last legislative session. The Senate now has the chance to confirm or reject McLeroy’s appointment.
4:55 – Dr. McLeroy, a Bryan dentist, is now before the Senate Nominations Committee. The committee will ask him questions about his role as Texas State Board of Education chairman and then take testimony from others wanting to speak out his appointment.
5:01 – Dr. McLeroy is defending the state board’s role in the curriculum and textbook adoption process. The Legislature is considering a slew of bills — including Senate Bill 2275 — that would strip the board of that authority. Dr. McLeroy argues that the state board has ensured that Texas has better curriculum standards.
5:05 – “We have much better textbooks because of the process of going through the State Board of Education.” Really, Dr. McLeroy? Will we have better science textbooks if they teach junk science because you reject evolution and want publishers to do the same?
5:07 – Dr. McLeroy calls the science curriculum revision “phenomenal” and praises the “compromise” standards adopted.
5:16 – Dr. McLeroy is crowing about the state board’s rejection of a mathematics textbook in 2007. The board, in fact, violated state law in rejecting the textbook. The law requires the board to approve textbooks that meet curriculum standards, are free of factual errors and meet manufacturing standards. The textbook met all of those, but the McLeroy majority rejected it without giving a reason. Dr. McLeroy later said the vote “set a precedent” for how the board could pressure publishers on other textbooks.
5:31 – Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso, is now asking Dr. McLeroy questions. “Is it your mission on this board to take all students in the state of Texas down the path of your religious beliefs?”
5:33 – McLeroy: My purpose has never been religious indoctrination.
5:34 – Sen. Shapleigh asks about a previous statement by McLeroy that only “orthodox” Christians — like him — on the state board had opposed biology textbooks that didn’t challenge evolution.
5:34 – McLeroy: I also complimented other board members as fine Christians. He’s missing the point of the question: if McLeroy’s opposition to evolution in science classrooms has nothing to do with religion, then why would he say only “orthodox” Christians oppose biology textbooks that challenge evolution?
5:36 – Sen. Shapleigh asks about McLeroy’s beliefs about evolution. McLeroy acknowledges that is is his personal belief that Earth is only 6,000 years old.
(Senate Nominations Committee) Chairman Mike Jackson, R-La Porte, said McLeroy’s nomination is on shaky ground because he might not be able to get the required two-thirds vote from the Senate.
Democratic senators Kirk Watson of Austin and Eliot Shapleigh of El Paso challenged McLeroy over his leadership during a number of controversial Board of Education decisions, including the recent adoption of new science curriculum standards that critics say undermine the teaching of evolution.
Shapleigh said he plans to have McLeroy separated from the others when his nomination comes up on the Senate floor so that it could be debated and voted on individually.
Opposition to Senate confirmation for Don McLeroy as chairman of the Texas State Board of Education appears to be hardening. Yesterday, Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso, and Sen. Kirk Watson, D-Austin, grilled McLeroy during a grueling hearing that lasted more than two hours. Both senators deserve hearty thanks from parents and other supporters of strong public schools for their efforts to expose the extremism that has turned the state board into a dysfunctional, deeply politicized mess.
According to the Houston Chronicle, Senate Nominations Committee chairman Mike Jackson, R-La Porte, thinks it could be difficult to get the necessary 21 votes (of 31 senators) for confirming McLeroy. Says Jackson:
“I’ll leave that up to the Senate. They have lots of people go through. The Senate will work that out.”
Ratcliffe then asked if the governor has been contacting senators and urging them to confirm McLeroy’s nomination. Gov. Perry’s answer seems to indicate that he’s not:
“I have 1,500 different appointees a year. We appoint them. They go through the process. That’s the way it’s always worked.”
It looks like the chances that McLeroy will win Senate confirmation are beginning to crumble. Well, if so, then what? The question will be whether the governor appoints a new chairman who puts the education of Texas children ahead of personal agendas and divisive politics.
Big news from the Texas Capitol: the Texas House of Representatives has just passed a constitutional amendment (HJR 77) and enabling legislation (HB 2037) that would transfer authority over the Permanent School Fund from the State Board of Education to an appointed Permanent School Fund Management Council. The author of both is state Rep. Donna Howard, D-Austin. This is another indication of lawmakers’ growing dissatisfaction with the state board. TFN President Kathy Miller has released the following statement:
This was an overwhelming, bipartisan vote for competence and common sense. Taxpayers have a right to expect that people who manage billions of their dollars for our kids’ education actually know what they’re doing. We hope the Senate will join the House in approving these critical measures for transparency and responsibility.
Both measures now go to the Senate. If HJR 77 passes the Senate, voters must approve the constitutional amendment.
Worried about the spread of swine flu? Wendy Wright from the far-right group Concerned Women for America thinks the alarm is all just part of a conspiracy by the Obama administration. Wright charges that the administration declared a “state of emergency” not to make it easier for the government to respond to outbreaks of swine flu in this country. No, she says, the real reason is to promote the nomination of Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius as secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services.
Some people think that declaring a state of emergency about the flu was a political thing to push the Sebelius nomination through. If there’s even a hint that [Department of Homeland Security] is manipulating the health situation to push a political appointee through, well, it almost defies imagination that they’d be willing to that.
If Wright wants to hear something that “defies imagination,” perhaps she should listen to her own whacked-out drivel. Far-right groups like CWA have been mounting a huge attack opposing the Senate confirmation of Sebelius, whose pro-choice views have made her the right’s newest devil. But the Obama administration is using concerns about swine flu to get her confirmed? Good heavens. Talk about paranoia.
According to the prophets, most will flock to this remarkable man as the proverbial moths to the flame. They will be drawn to his warmth and light only to be destroyed by his fire. Has this epoch moment arrived? Is the greatest conspiracy of all time unfolding before our eyes?
The brewing Republican civil war between religious extremists and traditional conservatives is heating up. Now Texas State Board of Education member Geraldine “Tincy” Miller of Dallas is sharply criticizing extremists who attacked her and fellow conservative Republicans during the recent debate over public school science curriculum standards.
Ms. Miller is denouncing “ultra-religious extremists” who attacked board members for voting against a requirement that students learn phony “weaknesses” of evolution in their science classrooms:
The three Reagan Republicans on the board, myself, Bob Craig & Pat Hardy, became targets of a particularly false smear campaign from a group of anti-science Republican fundamentalists sending threatening calls and e-mails.
In a clever and misleading “sound bite” argument, the Intelligent Design/Creationists were determined to insert religious discussion into the science curriculum of millions of Texas schoolchildren by forcing educators to teach “weaknesses of Evolution” … which deliberately confuses “hypothesis” with scientific theory.
Ms. Miller’s anger at the smear campaign that targeted her, Craig and Hardy is understandable. As TFN Insider has noted, creationist pressure groups viciously attacked the three, even calling their religious faith and personal morals into question. See here and here for examples.
Now bring in the children and latch the door. This could get ugly.
Our friends at Soulforce and Atticus Circle have launched an innovative — and much-needed – project to foster thoughtful discussion between faith communities and activists for gay and lesbian civil rights.
Between May 17 and June 28, 2009, groups of LGBT and allied people around the country will attend worship services at a church of their choice – a church that is not welcoming and affirming of openly LGBT members and guests. Each group will wear a lapel button that reads “gay? fine by me.”
Details about upcoming training sessions and how to participate in a “Sundays of Solidarity” event are available here. Listen to Rev. Paul Dodd of Austin explain the need for more honest, civil dialogue between the gay and lesbian community and congregants in churches that oppose LGBT rights.
The Texas Senate Nominations Committee this evening approved all nominees considered at last week’s hearing — except for Don McLeroy as chairman of the State Board of Education. Far-right pressure groups have targeted Senate offices with calls and e-mails in support of McLeroy’s confirmation, but opponents in that chamber still appear to have the votes to reject it on the floor. As a result, committee Chairman Mike Jackson, R-La Porte, seems prepared to leave McLeroy’s confirmation pending for now. Without Senate confirmation, the nomination will be considered rejected at the end of the session on June 1.
The confirmation of State Board of Education Chairman Don McLeroy is dead in the water, Sen. Mike Jackson, R-La Porte, said Thursday.
Jackson, chairman of the Senate Nominations Committee, said McLeroy will be left pending in committee because there is enough opposition on the floor of the Senate to block his confirmation, which requires approval of two-thirds of the senators.
Having done what they could to muck up the state’s science curriculum standards, fringe right-wingers on the Texas State Board of Education are now moving to politicize the social studies curriculum for public schools. Texas Freedom Network just sent out the following press release:
The Texas State Board of Education is set to appoint a social studies curriculum “expert” panel that includes absurdly unqualified ideologues who are hostile to public education and argue that laws and public policies should be based on their narrow interpretations of the Bible.
TFN has obtained the names of “experts” appointed by far-right state board members. Those panelists will guide the revision of social studies curriculum standards for Texas public schools. They include David Barton of the fundamentalist, Texas-based group WallBuilders, whose degree is in religious education, not the social sciences, and the Rev. Peter Marshall of Peter Marshall Ministries in Massachusetts, who suggests that California wildfires and Hurricane Katrina were divine punishments for tolerance of homosexuality.
In 1977, the Texas Legislature created the Sunset Advisory Commission to identify and eliminate waste, duplication, and inefficiency in government agencies. The 12-member Commission is a legislative body that reviews the policies and programs of more than 150 government agencies every 12 years. The Commission questions the need for each agency, looks for potential duplication of other public services or programs, and considers new and innovative changes to improve each agency’s operations and activities. The Commission seeks public input through hearings on every agency under Sunset review and recommends actions on each agency to the full Legislature. In most cases, agencies under Sunset review are automatically abolished unless legislation is enacted to continue them.
The Sunset review process would give the Legislature the opportunity to decide, after the commission’s recommendation, whether to make any changes to the state board’s authority. If during this session lawmakers don’t strip the board of its authority over curriculum and textbooks, for example, they could do so when the board comes up for Sunset review.
If it passes the House, HB 710 will head to the Senate. Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, is carrying the companion bill, Senate Bill 513.
Texas State Board of Education Chairman Don McLeroy has argued repeatedly that natural selection — he calls it ”unguided natural processes” – doesn’t account for the diversity of life today. He also insists that understanding evolution isn’t really important to the study of the biological sciences.
(U)nraveling all of this flu’s mysteries will take time. But, using the lens of Darwinian evolution, certain aspects are starting to come into focus. For one thing, it’s clear that the virus, which originated in Mexico, is most virulent in that country. The 1,000 or so reported Mexican cases have been either fatal or severe enough to require hospitalization. But because of natural selection, the strains spreading across the world are milder.
According to evolutionary biologist Paul W. Ewald of the University of Louisville, human influenza is usually a mild to moderate disease because it depends on host mobility to spread. The U.S., Canadian and New Zealand teenagers on their spring breaks did not sit in hospitals with the very sick and dying; they mingled with people who were sneezing and coughing but walking around, riding subways, perhaps going to the beach or dancing in nightclubs. People don’t start being really infectious until they show symptoms, and whatever symptoms those people had must have been mild enough to remain out in public. The strains sent out around the world were, by definition and necessity, milder than the most lethal strains.
Orent writes that understanding evolution helps health specialists and researchers predict what will happen in the future with this and other diseases. And, she says, understanding natural selection’s role in evolutionary processes helps us put what’s currently happening in perspective.
People died in Mexico because they were close to the epicenter of the disease, to the probable emergence of lethal strains from crowded pig breeding. But natural selection’s corrective action is swift and predictable: The strains spreading across the world are milder.
At his Senate confirmation hearing on April 22, Texas State Board of Education Chairman Don McLeroy once again rejected the expertise of hundreds of scientists, including Nobel laureates, who called on the board not to dumb down the public school science curriculum on evolution last month. Chairman McLeroy insisted, however, that he has a second cousin (a graduate student, no less) who told him understanding evolution really isn’t that important. (You’ll hear McLeroy’s discussion of his cousin at about the 1:50 mark. McLeroy’s questioner, Sen. Kirk Watson, D-Austin, wasn’t buying this nonsense, of course.)
IMPORTANT:Do not assume that McLeroy’s confirmation in the Senate is dead. Political fortunes can shift from day to day, and that’s particularly true in the legislative process. We expect horse-trading on a variety of issues will intensify in this final month of the 2009 legislative session.
Contact your state senator and tell him or her you want a State Board of Education chairman who will put the education of schoolchildren ahead of his own personal and political agendas.
No matter where you live, join the Texas Freedom Network and support our work for sound science, quality public education, religious freedom and civil liberties.
Mocking the stone age science at the Texas State Board of Education has now gone viral — late-night comedians have the rest of the country laughing at us. Bill Maher de-pantsed the governor on last Friday’s episode of his HBO series Real Time with Bill Maher.
He [Perry] appointed a creationist to head the Texas State Board of Education, which is shocking. Texas has a board of education?!?
Ouch.
And Maher surely speaks for scientists everywhere when he scolds Texas politicians who had a sudden come-to-science moment last week when confonted with the outbreak of swine flu.
You can’t crap all over Darwin and stem cell research and global warming, then come crawling back to science when you want Tamiflu.
Watch the whole embarrassing segment (warning: Maher’s language is colorful).
This is Membership Week at Texas Freedom Network. Since its founding by Cecile Richards in 1995, TFN has worked to defend religious freedom, protect individual liberties and promote quality public education for all families. Many other organizations focus on specific issue areas in fighting the radical right in this state. We are honored to stand with them all in support of the mainstream values that have been under attack. But TFN remains the only broad-based organization in Texas dedicated to fighting back against the religious right’s corrosive influence over public policy — from the Capitol to the State Board of Education and beyond.
We hope you will take the opportunity this week to join TFN and support our work. It sounds like a cliche, but it’s true: we can’t do our work without the support of people like many of you who come to this blog, read our Daily News Clips, contact lawmakers and do so many other things to help make Texas a better place for all our children. If you haven’t done so already, please consider joining TFN or renewing your membership today by clicking here.
UPDATE: As Lee notes in his comment below, the House didn’t get to HB 710 on Monday. It’s on the House supplemental calendar for today (Tuesday, May 5).
Here’s another of the apparently countless reasons why one shouldn’t rely on the far-right Free Market Foundation Focus on the Family-Texas for information. Free Market says it is circulating a flier on the floor of the Texas House calling for representatives to oppose House Bill 710 when it comes up for a vote today. HB 710 by Rep. Patrick Rose, D-Dripping Springs, would make the Texas State Board of Education subject to periodic review by the Sunset Advisory Commission. We haven’t seen the flier, but we wonder if this factoid from Free Market’s blog made it on there (as it did in a Free Market alert to the group’s e-mail list earlier today):
This bill requires the State Board of Education to be subject to “Sunset Review”, which is a form of periodic review where a group of 10 elected officials and 2 unelected officials review state agencies and have the ability to abolish such agencies.
If HB 710 passes, the SBOE would be the only elected body to be subject to Sunset Review.
A couple of our readers have pointed to an example of how the debate over science education has divided conservative ranks. Joel Walker is a candidate for the local school board in College Station, home of Texas State Board of Education chairman Don McLeroy. While we can’t endorse Mr. Walker’s candicacy, we found his perspective on science education refreshing. If you want to read a self-described conservative Republican’s defense of sound science education, check this out.
Excerpts:
The proponents of ["intelligent design"] are generally careful to avoid explicit religious language, and often cast themselves as the protectors of science, innocuously seeking to probe the “strengths and weaknesses” of evolutionary biology and big-bang cosmology in an open minded manner. Certainly science embraces skepticism, but there is a deep flaw in the vision of science which is being advocated. Skepticism in the face of a preponderance of evidence is only unreasonable doubt.
Admitting some few exceptions, the considered verdict on these matters among active researchers in the relevant fields is settled, with a statistical weight approaching unanimity. It is inappropriate to ask our high school students to sit in their judgment; we must first simply educate them as to what has been learned. Surely the ultimate truths of science are not up for, nor are ever settled by, a vote of men. As a practical matter however, the science standards of our state are up for vote once each decade. An entrenched mindset bordering on reflexive antipathy to the opinions of our most distinguished scholars has no place on our State Board of Education.
That is the title of a new screed by SBOE Rep. Ken Mercer, R-San Antonio. According to Mercer, the Senate is blocking the nomination of Don McLeroy as board chair not because his tenure has been an unmitigated disaster, but because McLeroy is – you guessed it – a Christian.
It is official; conservative Christians are unqualified and need not apply. It happened at the Miss USA Pageant and then at the Nominations Committee of the Texas State Senate.
(First of all, Mercer deserves credit for coming up with the most apt comparison to date for the level of intellectual debate at the Texas SBOE — a beauty pageant. The uninformed, vapid discourse at the board resembles nothing so much as a room full of beauty pageant contestants confidently asserting opinions on politics or world affairs. And both ellicit similar snickers and groans from the audience.)
But on to Mercer’s primary contention. Let’s unpack this a bit. Mercer and other self-described social conservatives on the board have regularly and vigorously insisted that their actions are NOT religiously motivated. Mercer does it again here:
As is obvious to all, there are zero references to faith, religion, creation, or intelligent design in the newly adopted Science standards.
But he goes on to insist that McLeroy is being attacked because of his faith! So senators should support McLeroy because he’s a good Christian?
Mercer wants it both ways here. He wants to drape McLeroy in the mantle of Christianity, holding him up as a Christian freedom fighter who is “willing to clearly and calmly state and stand by [his] Christian beliefs.” But should anyone follow up with the obvious question about whether McLeroy or the board is attempting to use their authority to advance personal beliefs in public policy, Mercer cries “religious discrimination” and slanders those who oppose McLeroy as God-haters. (It is “atheists and secular humanists” who are attacking him!)
The mere fact that it is ONLY the most extreme voices on the religious right that have ridden to McLeroy’s — and the SBOE’s — defense is instructive. The silence from mainstream academics, professional educators and moderate lawmakers is deafening.
CORRECTION: The House approval of HB 710 this evening was on second reading. The House must pass it on third reading, probably tomorrow, to send it to the Senate. Even so, tonight was a very important step forward. Edited post follows:
Defying far-right pressure groups that flooded Capitol offices with misleading calls and e-mails, the Texas House has just approved on second reading House Bill 710, which would make the State Board of Education subject to periodic review by the Sunset Advisory Commission. The vote was 74-68, and the House must pass it on third reading to send it to the Senate.
The House earlier this session passed HJR 77 and HB 2037, which would take control over the Permanent School Fund from the state board and put it in the hands of finance professionals. In addition, the House has passed HB 772, which would require the state board to broadcast video and audio of its meetings live over the Internet so that taxpayers can watch board members do their work.
Texas Freedom Network President Kathy Miller released the following statement after this evening’s House vote:
“The House this session clearly seems intent on bringing transparency, accountability and expertise to education policy because the state board has repeatedly demonstrated a lack of respect for all three. Parents and other taxpayers have a right to expect swift action from the Senate on these kinds of common-sense, good-government bills.”
We can’t decide if this is sad or funny. Watch Congressman Mike Pence, R-Indiana, squirm during his appearance yesterday on MSNBC’s Hardball when host Chris Matthews asks him directly whether he accepts evolution.
After several unsuccesful attempts to evade the question or change the subject, Matthews nails him:
I think that you’re afraid to say [that you accept evolution] because your conservative constituency might find that offensive.
While Pence’s clumsy obfuscation will not win him praise in the science community, he has positioned himself well to be named an “expert reviewer” by the Texas State Board of Education when we adopt new biology textbooks in two years.
Will Republican legislators ever find the courage to get off their knees when they get pressure from far-right groups? Not today, it seems.
Just yesterday the Texas House approved on second reading House Bill 710, which would have made the Texas State Board of Education subject to periodic review by the Sunset Advisory Commission. That vote was 74-68. But the House just voted down the measure on third reading, 71-73. Only one Republican crossed the aisle to vote for HB 710.
The vote came after religious conservatives — rallied by a virtual “who’s who” of right-wing pressure groups — bombarded House offices with e-mails and phone calls opposing this common-sense bill. That pressure campaign didn’t surprise us — far-right groups have been thrilled that the state board is controlled by ideologues who keep dragging public schools into the culture wars. But the vote should be terribly disappointing for parents and other taxpayers who are tired of extremists using the State Board of Education as a playground for promoting ideological agendas.
Texas Freedom Network has just sent out the following Action Alert:
Time and again over the last three years, Chairman Don McLeroy and the far-right faction of the Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) have demonstrated their willingness to push an extremist agenda and sacrifice quality public education at the altar of partisan politics. Yet unbelievably, Gov. Rick Perry has nominated McLeroy to a second term as chair.
The decision currently before the state Senate — to confirm or deny McLeroy’s appointment — is a clear referendum on the outrageous antics of the State Board of Education. If he is allowed to continue as chair, SBOE members will see a green light for continuing their damaging pattern of ignoring the law and disregarding experts and teachers.
This is our chance to send a strong message to the board that “enough is enough.”
What Can You Do?
The Senate Nominations Committee has left SBOE Chairman Don McLeroy’s confirmation pending, and it’s important for EVERY SENATOR to hear that McLeroy is the wrong choice to lead the State Board of Education. (Click here to find your Senator.)
Why Does It Matter? Religious-right pressure groups, including the Texas chapter of James Dobson’s Focus on the Family and the Texas Pastor Council, have unleashed a flurry of calls urging legislators to support the SBOE. And their calls are having an effect. We have heard from senators that they are swamped with calls demanding McLeroy’s confirmation. Further, earlier today the House reversed a previous vote and rejected HB 710, a common-sense measure that would have put the State Board of Education under periodic review by the Sunset Advisory Commission. This change of heart is obviously a capitulation to pressure from far-right groups.
Now it is time for mainstream Texans to weigh in. Not hesitantly. Not in small numbers. The almost 5 million children in Texas who attend public school deserve a quality education, and they will not get it as long as the McLeroy-led board drags our schools into the culture wars.
Please call your senator TODAY and urge her or him to oppose Don McLeroy’s confirmation as chair of the SBOE. And ask everyone you know who cares about public schools to do the same.
This isn’t a partisan issue. Whether your senator is a Democrat or Republican, it’s important to call or e-mail that office. It’s past time for legislators to put the education of our children ahead of party loyalty and political agendas.
Texas State Board of Education member Terri Leo, R-Spring, apparently has decided that she is the arbiter when it comes to deciding who is a good conservative. In telling the Christian-right Web site OneNewsNow.com that she opposes legislative efforts to rein in the state board’s authority, she says:
[B]ack in 2003, conservatives on the State Board of Education lost most of the battles — and we didn’t go over and whine and seek legislative go-a-rounds or end-a-rounds. You know, we just went to work and elected three more conservatives and [now] the Board is almost evenly balanced. There’s [sic] seven conservatives out of 15 board members. We do not have a majority.
Of course, Ms. Leo doesn’t acknowledge that one of those seven is the board chairman, who sets the agenda and controls the debate. Moreover, those seven have often succeeded in gathering at least one or two votes from other board members on key issues the last two years. How they have succeeded in doing so is an open question — for now.
But this sentence in Ms. Leo’s response really stands out: “There’s [sic] seven conservatives out of 15 board members.” Just seven conservatives? Really?
Texas State Board of Education Chairman Don McLeroy, R-College Station, has been making the rounds of Senate offices this week with a lobbyist from Free Market Foundation Focus on the Family-Texas. The two are trying to turn the tide on McLeroy’s endangered confirmation for another term as board chairman. We hear from one Capitol office that McLeroy is telling folks he believes his confirmation hopes have been resuscitated.
Perhaps that’s just empty bravado before the gallows. But we are concerned that Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst has yet to assign to committee a constitutional amendment that would strip the state board of its authority over the Permanent School Fund. With elections looming next year, is Lt. Gov. Dewhurst looking to curry favor with social conservatives who support the state board? Is he also working now to win McLeroy’s confirmation? News reports have indicated that McLeroy’s confirmation is dead. But as we’ve said before: don’t assume anything in the last month of a legislative session.
Thanks very much to all who have taken the opportunity during this Membership Week to join or renew your membership with the Texas Freedom Network. The response to this special membership drive has been phenomenal. If you haven’t done so already, please click here to join TFN or renew your membership today.
We oppose Barton’s appointment to the panel because he lacks the academic credentials to qualify by any stretch of the imagination as a social studies “expert.” His personal religious beliefs are irrelevant, as is the faith of each individual appointed to the social studies panel.
Barton’s college degree is in religious education, not history or another field in the social sciences. He works for no institution of higher education. He’s simply a smooth-talking political hack who distorts history in the service of an ideological agenda.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry will be one of the speakers at an annual gathering of the religious right September 18-20 in Washington, D.C. The so-called “Values Voter Summit” is sponsored by far-right groups like the Family Research Council, American Family Association and Focus on the Family. The event brings together politicos and celebrities to spend three days railing against abortion, gay folks and the nation’s alleged slide into socialism. News of Gov. Perry’s appearance hardly comes as a surprise. With his re-election battle looming next year, he continues to court his religious-right base at every opportunity.
There will also be plenty of fringe-right politicos, including U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn, to help burn sinners at the stake. In case the name is unfamiliar to you, Rep. Bachmann is the Minnesota congresswoman who blames swine flu Democrats, claims President Obama and some members of Congress are “anti-American,” argues that science shows human activity is not contributing to global warming, and wants Americans “armed and dangerous” in opposition to President Obama’s policies.
Do you know young folks who want to advocate for responsible sexuality education in Texas? The Texas Freedom Network is now accepting applications for our 2009 Summer Summit Activist Training. The summit will be in Austin June 12-13, and participants must be ages 15-24. The application deadline is May 26.
Participants will learn how to get involved in local school districts to promote sexuality education that emphasizes abstinence while also including medically accurate information on responsible pregnancy and disease prevention. They will also learn strategies for motivating their peers and encouraging them to join the cause.
Why is this so important? Texas has among the nation’s highest rates of teen births and sexually transmitted infections. Yet a recent TFN Education Fund report revealed that Texas classrooms are perpetuating a “conspiracy of silence” that robs young people of the reliable information they need to make responsible life decisions when it comes to sexuality and health. Even worse, the information students do receive is often grossly distorted or simply wrong.
The Summer Summit will be held at the University of Texas campus in Austin and is free for participants. Participants will stay at a private dormitory on the edge of campus, and adult chaperones will be present throughout the event.
The level of paranoia on the far right is off the scale. Today Cathie Adams, head of Texas Eagle Forum, sent out an e-mail blast attacking legislation that would create a workgroup to develop recommendations for integrating health and behavioral health services in Texas.
[Texas Eagle Forum] stopped a similar bill the last two sessions because it would have required physicians to screen / analyze your mental health each doctor visit. It is now more dangerous than ever with the federal government taking up nationalized / rationed health care. Texans must not surrender our mental and physical health to a socialist State that President Obama is striving toward.
Huh? House Bill 2196 is authored by Rep. Vicki Truitt, R-Keller, in the House and sponsored by Sen. Robert Deuell, R-Greenville. These two conservative Republicans are somehow trying to undermine freedom by wanting to study how mental health services might be useful in treating patients who present with physical ailments? (Never mind, of course, Ms. Adams’ attacks on President Obama as a closet socialist. That’s standard fare these days on the far right.)
Research indicates that people with serious mental illness are more likely than those without mental illness to have poor physical health and face premature death due to untreated and poorly managed medical conditions, such as cardiovascular, pulmonary, and infectious diseases.
In addition to the unacceptable human cost associated with untreated medical conditions and premature death, people with mental illness and other chronic conditions are the greatest users of health services and emergency room care. Evidence demonstrates that integrated health care improves access to and service outcomes for persons with or at-risk for mental illness. Establishing a workgroup in Texas focused on improving integrated health care is of primary importance.
Texas Freedom Network has no position on this bill — it’s not one of the issues we monitor. But we wonder how traditional conservatives take folks like Ms. Adams seriously anymore. Really.
The Internal Revenue Service has ruled against a complaint filed by the Texas Freedom Network asking whether a tax-exempt, nonprofit foundation improperly sought to mobilize conservative pastors for partisan electoral purposes beginning in 2005. In January 2008 we asked the IRS to investigate whether the Houston-based Niemoller Foundation improperly engaged in partisan political activity on behalf of Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s re-election in 2006. You can read our press release at the time here and supporting documents here.
The focus of the complaint was Niemoller’s funding of six “Pastors’ Policy Briefings”in 2005 (and a seventh to celebrate the governor’s inauguration in January 2007) hosted by an entity called the Texas Restoration Project. (You can read about the Texas Restoration Project in a TFN Education Fund report here, pages 13-16. ) We also asked whether Niemoller had improperly helped distribute political propaganda in support of a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, a measure Texas voters approved in 2005.
On Friday the Texas Senate passed legislation that requires live video and audio Webcasts of State Board of Education meetings. House Bill 772 by state Rep. Donna Howard, D-Austin, is the only bill that focuses on the controversy-plagued state board to have now passed both the House and Senate. Currently, Texans can follow board meetings only by audio on the Web, although legislative proceedings — committee meetings and well as House and Senate floor action — have been available to voters by live video streamed over the Internet. Many supporters of HB 772 hope video Webcasting will help voters learn more about how the state board crafts education policy for Texas public schools. If Gov. Rick Perry signs the bill, the Webcasting requirement will take effect Sept. 1 of this year.
Other SBOE reform legislation is still languishing in committee. HB 2037 and HJR 77 (a constitutional amendment) would shift authority over the Permanent School Fund from the state board to an appointed board of finance professionals. Both measures, also authored by Rep. Howard, have passed the House but are now sitting in the Senate Education Committee. Committee Chairwoman Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, has scheduled neither for a public hearing or vote. Sen. Shapiro also hasn’t set Senate Bill 2275 for a committee vote. SB 2275 — with three Republican and two Democratic co-authors in the Senate — would strip the state board of its authority over setting curriculum standards and adopting textbooks.
The Senate Nominations Committee is still sitting on the confirmation of Don McLeroy, R-College Station, as chairman of the state board. Word is that Senate Democrats remain almost solidly opposed to his confirmation and have been joined privately by at least a few Republicans. If the Senate doesn’t confirm McLeroy by the end of the session on June 1, Gov. Perry will be forced to name another chairman. Unfortunately, that chairman would not be subject to confirmation until the Senate is again in session. Barring a special session, the Senate will not be back in Austin until January 2011.
Ever wonder how a widely used math textbook could illegally promote “New Age religion”? If not, you clearly don’t share the same wild imagination as creationists in Texas do.
Mr. Mercer portrays himself, Chairman McLeroy and their allies on the board as champions of reform doing battle with “education bureaucrats and lobbyists” — “educrats,” he calls them. Among the “victories” he points to in this “reform” campaign are the board’s rejection of a mathematics textbook two years ago and the adoption of new curriculum standards for language arts and science.
Texas Freedom Network is sending out the following Action Alert. Please forward this link to anyone interested in supporting responsible sex education.
More than decade of stubborn commitment by policy-makers to failed abstinence-only programs in Texas schools have had disastrous consequences:
Texas ranks third in teen births and first in multiple births to teens.
Parenthood is the top reason teen girls drop out of school.
Teen pregnancy cost Texas taxpayers $1 billion in 2004.
A number of promising bills were filed this legislative session to respond to this appalling situation, but as the legislative session draws to a close, it appears they have all been blocked by abstinence-only supporters who are satisfied with the status quo. On Monday, however, several lawmakers will make a final push to respond to the epidemic of teen births in our state and improve sex education in Texas classrooms. But they need our help.
The Texas House is taking up important legislation on Monday that could help ensure Texas teens learn responsible information on pregnancy and disease prevention. The House will consider Senate Bill 283 by Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound. Sen. Nelson’s bill strengthens the requirement that every school district in Texas have an active School Health Advisory Council that provides community and parental input regarding policies on health education, including sex education.
TFN supports this responsible bill by Sen. Nelson. We are also supporting key amendments that would specifically improve sex education in public schools. You can help pass these amendments by contacting your local legislator immediately and through the vote on Monday.
Support the amendment by Rep. Castro to require that sex education be medically accurate.
Fact: 41% of Texas school districts teach factually incorrect information in sexuality education instruction.
Support the amendment by Rep. Villarreal to prevent materials from discouraging condom and contraceptive use by teens who are sexually active.
Fact: 40% of Texas school districts include medically inaccurate information that discourages young people from making responsible decisions to prevent pregnancy and disease.
Support the amendment by Rep. Strama to require school districts to provide parents with written notice about the content of the district’s human sexuality instruction.
Fact: Polls have shown that up to 90% of Texans want abstinence-plus information about contraception and disease prevention included in sexuality education, but 96% of Texas schools don’t provide that information.
Support the amendment by Rep. Castro to require School Health Advisory Councils (SHACs) to have at least 5 members.
Fact: 81% of school districts surveyed in 2008 could not produce any SHAC recommendation on sexuality education instruction despite the fact that the law requires SHACs to provide community and parental input in district decisions regarding human sexuality instruction.
Please contact the TFN outreach office and let us know what you’re told by your House representative’s office. You can e-mail tfn@tfn.org or call Val or Judie at 512-322-0545 on Monday.
UPDATE: The House has postponed action on SB 283 until Wednesday. Keep up your calls and e-mails to House offices in support of responsible sex education.
Having made a fetish out of failed abstinence-only programs that lie to students, far-right pressure groups are also lying directly to voters. Texans for Life Coalition has sent out an e-mail blast that employs more lies in its reckless campaign to keep teens ignorant. The group includes ridiculous claims that amendments under consideration in the Texas House today would “outlaw abstinence-only sex ed,” “censor information about limitations of condoms and contraception,” “promote birth control as a health benefit,” “refer students to Planned Parenthood,” and “promote recreational and gay sex.” (If all else fails, drag homosexuality into it, right? You can almost feel the hate from these people.)
Such nonsense. We told you yesterday what the amendments would do. They would require that information taught about human sexuality and pregnancy and disease prevention be medically accurate. Abstinence-only programs would no longer be able to exaggerate failure rates of condoms and other forms of contraception to discourage their use. School districts would be required to tell parents what they’re actually teaching about human sexuality. And local School Health Advisory Councils would have to be structured to provide local community and parental input on health education issues in school districts.
The rate of teen pregnancy in Texas is among the highest in the nation, yet this state has received more federal abstinence-only funding than any other. In the face of this epidemic of teen pregnancy and soaring rates of sexually transmitted diseases, more than 9 in 10 school districts teach nothing about pregnancy and disease prevention except abstinence-only-until-marriage. And abstinence-only programs are plagued with gross factual errors, lies and stereotypes. This nonsense can’t continue. Ignorance and lies won’t protect our kids.
EARLIER UPDATE: Now the Plano-based Free Market Foundation Focus on the Family-Texas is attacking the amendments, claiming that they would require “so-called ‘medically accurate’ information.” “This determination is left to persons who have an agenda,” they say. Actually, the amendment on medically accurate information lists seven agencies and professional organizations for verifying information: the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Public Health Association, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the Infectious Diseases Societyof America and the American Psychological Association. They do have an agenda, of course: keeping Americans healthy.
The lies from far-right pressure groups continue to pile up, don’t they? They threw truth out the window long ago.
It’s very important that supporters of responsible, medically accurate sex education in public schools keep calling their Texas House members. Texas Freedom Network is sending out the following Action Alert:
Far-right pressure groups – like James Dobson’s Focus on the Family affiliate in Texas – have launched a “fear and smear” campaign against proposals to help ensure teens learn medically accurate information on responsible pregnancy and disease prevention. That campaign has already led the Texas House to postpone action until Wednesday on Senate Bill 283. The bill would strengthen the role of School Health Advisory Councils in developing policies on health education in local school districts.
Why would anyone oppose common-sense amendments to that bill requiring schools to teach medically accurate information, inform parents about what those schools are teaching students and ensure effective community input on sex education policies?
The answer is simple: lobbyists for abstinence-only-until-marriage programs are basing their opposition on ideology, not facts. Here are just some of the lies lawmakers are hearing: the amendments would “outlaw abstinence-only sex ed,” “censor information” about contraceptive failure rates and “promote recreational and gay sex.” These blatant falsehoods are outrageous!
We Need Your Help!
Don’t let far-right groups pressure lawmakers into backing down on ensuring that Texas teens get the medically accurate information they need to make important life decisions and protect themselves from pregnancy and disease. It’s critical that you TAKE ACTION to counter the far right’s reckless and dishonest campaign.
Contact your Texas House representative and ask him or her to support these amendments to SB 283:
Support the amendment by Rep. Joaquin Castro to require that sex education be medically accurate according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Physicians.
Fact: 41% of Texas school districts teach factually incorrect information in sexuality education instruction.
Support the amendment by Rep. Michael Villarreal to prevent materials that wildly exaggerate failure rates to discourage condom and contraceptive use by people who are sexually active.
Fact: 40% of Texas school districts include medically inaccurate information that discourages young people from making responsible decisions to prevent pregnancy and disease.
Support the amendment by Rep. Mark Strama to require school districts to provide parents with written notice about the content of the district’s human sexuality instruction. Don’t parents have a right to know?
Fact: Polls have shown that up to 90% of Texans want abstinence-plus information about contraception and disease prevention included in sexuality education, but 96% of Texas schools don’t provide that information.
Support the amendment by Rep. Joaquin Castro to require School Health Advisory Councils (SHACs) to have at least 5 members. Isn’t community input important?
Fact: 81% of school districts surveyed in 2008 could not produce any SHAC recommendation on sexuality education instruction despite the fact that the law requires SHACs to provide community and parental input in district decisions regarding human sexuality instruction.
You can find the name and contact information for your House representative here. Tell your representative that Texas ranks third in teen births, first in multiple births to teens, and that the teen birth rate is rising. Having a baby is the top reason teen girls drop out of school. And teen pregnancy cost Texas taxpayers $1 billion in 2004. Public schools should emphasize the importance of abstinence AND tell students the truth about how to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.
Please contact the TFN outreach office at tfn@tfn.org to let us know that you have taken action so that we can track our progress.
Texas Monthly’s Burkablog is reporting that Senate Finance Committee Chairman Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, has given up trying to include a ban on public funding for embryonic stem cell research in the state budget. Patricia Kilday Hart writes that Ogden announced this morning that a House-Senate conference committee “couldn’t come to a consensus” on whether to include the ban. So it’s out.
This is a huge victory for supporters of responsible medical research that gives hope to families struggling with debilitating medical conditions like Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, spinal cord injuries and cancer. Last month we called on supporters of stem cell research to call their House representatives and help keep Ogden’s ban out of the House’s version of the state budget. And you came through! The House refused to include the ban, and House negotiators on the conference committee also stood firm against it.
Ogden’s ban would have been a disaster for responsible and promising medical research. Although the state currently does not fund embryonic stem cell research, Ogden’s ban would have threatened even privately funded research at publicly funded facilities. Moreover, it would have discouraged medical researchers from coming to Texas and encouraged those already here to leave.
This victory helps restore hope for so many families struggling with serious medical conditions that are currently incurable. TFN will continue to support those families by opposing efforts to ban or limit embryonic stem cell research in Texas.
During the recent debate over science curriculum standards in Texas, State Board of Education member Ken Mercer argued that science hadn’t found transitional fossils that would back up the science of evolution. He demanded to know why scientists couldn’t show him a “dog-cat” or a “cat-rat,” for example.
It made no difference that some of the state’s most respected scientists — some of the world’s most respected scientists — were telling the board that there were countless examples of transitional fossils. Moreover, they argued, genetic evidence for evolution was even more solid.
They were met by skepticism and not a little derision by Mr. Mercer and other creationists on the board.
Now European scientists are pointing to yet another transitional fossil — although not quite Mr. Mercer’s ‘dog-cat’ — that creationists will ignore. From CNN:
Scientists hailed Tuesday a 47-million-year-old fossil of an ancient “small cat”-sized primate as a possible common ancestor of monkeys, primates and humans.
Scientists say the fossil, dubbed “Ida,” is a transitional species, living around the time the primate lineage split into two groups: A line that would eventually produce humans, primates and monkeys, and another that would give rise to lemurs and other primates.
An Associated Press story about the same finding quotes researchers who believe another fossil found in China provides far better evidence of a transitional species in the early monkey-ape-human ancestral line.
In any case, the point here is that the evidence for evolution is clear and abundant. Scientists repeatedly have pointed that out. But evidence for willful and determined ignorance on the Texas State Board of Education has also been clear and abundant. Some board members themselves have repeatedly pointed that out by their own words and actions.
In a surprise meeting on the Senate floor, the Senate Nominations Committee in Austin has just approved the appointment of Don McLeroy as chairman of the Texas State Board of Education. It appears that McLeroy’s supporters plan to bring his confirmation to the full Senate early next week. Confirmation will require a two-thirds vote.
Committee Chairman Mike Jackson, R-La Porte, had said he would not bring up McLeroy’s confirmation for a vote in committee unless he thought there were enough votes to get it in the full Senate. We don’t know at this point whether opposition from nearly all Democrats and some Republicans has softened, but the signs are alarming.
Texas Freedom Network President Kathy Miller has released the following statement:
“If the Texas Senate genuinely cares about quality public education, they will reject as state board chairman a man who apparently agrees that parents who want to teach their kids about evolution are monsters. And we’ll see whether senators really want a chairman who presides over a board that is so focused on ‘culture war’ battles that it has made Texas look like an educational backwater to the rest of the country.”
The Texas House failed today to pass a measure that would require information in public school sex education classes be medically accurate. Texas Freedom Network sent out the following press release:
Texas Freedom Network President Kathy Miller decried today’s failure by the Texas House to require that public schools teach only medically accurate information in sex education classes.
An amendment requiring that information in sex ed classes be medically accurate was blocked by a point of order claiming that the measure was not germane to Senate Bill 283. Yet SB 283 sets meeting and reporting requirements for School Health Advisory Councils, which advise local school boards and administrators on health education instruction, including sex education. Moreover, the House had just unanimously passed an amendment to the same bill requiring that districts notify parents about the content of sex education instruction in their schools.
“It’s absurd for lawmakers to hide behind parliamentary tactics so they can avoid requiring that students get medically accurate information in their sex education classes,” Miller said. “No wonder a teenager gets pregnant every 10 minutes in Texas. Grownups in the Texas House are scared to even talk about how to prevent it.”
Texas ranks third in the nation in teen births and first in multiple births to teens. The Texas Department of State Health Services reports that a teen in Texas gets pregnant every 10 minutes.
The point of order came after an intense three-day campaign by opponents of the “medically accurate” amendment who instead support abstinence-only-until-marriage programs. Abstinence-only supporters falsely claimed that the amendment would “outlaw abstinence-only ed,” “censor information” about contraceptive failure rates, and “promote recreational and gay sex.”
“What could possibly be wrong with giving our kids medically accurate information from the Centers for Disease Control or the American Academy of Pediatrics instead of discredited ideological diatribes about birth control and disease prevention?” Miller said. “That’s what this amendment would have done. But today we found out that at least in Texas, the same old ‘culture war’ lies and distortions are still enough to stop even discussion about common-sense approaches to ending the epidemic of teen pregnancy and STDs. Today ignorance won out over truth, and Texas teens will pay the price.”
In February the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund released a report from two Texas State University health education professors that showed more than 9 in 10 Texas school districts teach virtually nothing about pregnancy and disease prevention except abstinence until marriage. The study also found factual errors in abstinence/sex education materials from more than 40 percent of districts.
Outrageous claims in an effort to win Senate confirmation of Don McLeroy as chairman of the Texas State Board of Education reveal once again how vicious and dishonest the far right can be. As we reported Wednesday, the Senate Nominations Committee has forwarded McLeroy’s nomination to the full Senate for a vote (probably next week). Here’s what we’re seeing in right-wing blogs and e-mails:
TFN was shocked — shocked! — t0 learn who stabbed these teachers in the back by leaking the incomplete standards to a political pressure group. None other than our old friend and embattled board chairman, Don McLeroy.
Another early hint of trouble brewing in the Texas State Board of Education’s revision of social studies curriculum standards: attacks on minority contributions to American history and society. And once again Chairman Don McLeroy, R-College Station, is right in the middle of the brouhaha.
How can he possibly be serious? Not satisfied with the two absurdly unqualified ideologues already appointed to a so-called “expert” review panel for new public school social studies curriculum standards, Texas State Board of Education Chairman Don McLeroy wants another that could be even worse. And he has been lobbying other board members hard to make that appointment.
TFN Insider has learned that McLeroy wants to appoint to the panel Allen Quist, a Minnesotan whose politics are so extreme that he suffered a humiliating landslide defeat in his bid for the Republican nomination for governor of his home state in 1994. If Quist is an “expert” in anything, it’s not in social studies. It’s in promoting the nation’s divisive “culture wars”
Quist originally made a name for himself as a radical anti-abortion crusader who opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest. In his 1980 book The Abortion Revolution, Quist even compares abortion to Hitler’s murder of millions of Jews.
A renewed effort by Texas legislators to put the State Board of Education under Sunset review fizzled this past weekend under pressure from Senate leaders. It appears that Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, had rounded up enough Democratic and Republican votes to add the requirement to House Bill 1959 (which deals with various other agencies under Sunset review). Sen. Ellis’ amendment didn’t allow for the abolishment of the SBOE — it simply provided for a one-time review of whether the board works efficiently and performs as expected by taxpayers and the Legislature. But Senate leaders stepped in and blocked Sen. Ellis’ effort on Saturday.
Similar legislation that would have put the SBOE under periodic review by the state’s Sunset Advisory Commission failed in the House last month. HB 710 got preliminary approval on second reading but failed to win final passage the next day when Republican leaders made its rejection a required demonstration of party loyalty. (The SBOE currently has a 10-5 Republican majority.)
Another bill to rein in the SBOE’s authority, Senate Bill 2275, has failed to get out of committee even though three Republican senators are co-authors. And legislation to shift management of the Permanent School Fund from the SBOE to professionals who know what they’re doing is also growing mold while it sits in the Senate Education Committee.
So we wonder: why have Republican leaders put party politics ahead of the interests of Texas schoolchildren?
Word is that Don McLeroy’s name is on the list of nominees distributed to state senators in Austin today. That means his confirmation as chairman of the Texas State Board of Education could come up for debate and a vote as early as this afternoon, although it’s more likely tomorrow.
We know that far-right groups have been bombarding Capitol offices with phone calls and e-mails in support of McLeroy’s confirmation. Make sure senators know that mainstream Texans are fed up with seeing our public schools dragged into the nation’s divisive culture wars. If you haven’t done so already, please ask your senator to oppose McLeroy’s confirmation. Tell your senator that this vote is a referendum on whether the Senate wants a state board chairman who promotes his own personal and political agendas ahead of the interests of Texas schoolchildren and their families. You can find your senator’s name and contact information here. Then please let us know what you hear from your senator’s office by e-mailing tfn@tfn.org.
During the recent debate over evolution and science curriculum standards in Texas, a favorite source for “quote mining” by State Board of Education Chairman Don McLeroy was work by the late Stephen Jay Gould. McLeroy did his twisted best to portray Gould — who was one of the country’s most respected evolutionary biologists — as an evolution skeptic.
As McLeroy stumbled his way through one distorted quote after another from Gould, we watched our friends from the National Center for Science Education sigh and slowly shake their heads. So it’s with great satisfaction that we learn the news that Genie Scott, NCSE’s executive director, has been awarded the Stephen Jay Gould Prize by the Society for the Study of Evolution.
The Prize ”recognizes individuals whose sustained and exemplary efforts have advanced public understanding of evolutionary science and its importance in biology, education, and everyday life in the spirit of Stephen Jay Gould.”
Genie and the other folks at NCSE have been invaluable resources and allies for TFN during the recent curriculum debate and when the state board adopted new biology textbooks in 2003. They are not only smart and determined defenders of science — they are also wonderful friends and colleagues in our common efforts to promote sound science education for Texas schoolchildren.
This was so completely predictable, wasn’t it? The religious right is exploding in expected fury at President Obama’s nomination of Sonia Sotomayor for the U.S. Supreme Court. Nevermind that the first President Bush appointed Sotomayor as a federal disrict judge. The religious right was determined to oppose any Obama nomination, whomever he chose (although Republicans have some difficult choices ahead).
Rick Scarborough, head of Texas-based Vision America, is one of the first religious-right pooh-bahs to jump on the war wagon:
At age 54, Sotomayor could be a member of the United States Supreme Court for the next 20 years — or longer. As a dedicated liberal, we know her views on abortion, gay marriage and reverse- discrimination — whether or not she’s ruled directly on these issues.
That much power simply can’t be bestowed by a compliant Senate. This nomination must be stopped dead in its tracks. Sonia Sotomayor isn’t a ‘centrist,’ she’s a disaster at every level.
We’ll keep an eye on what other other Texas religious-righters have to say about the nomination. But there is little doubt that we’ll see an avalanche of righteous indignation intended to stir up the base (and open wallets for donations).
Embattled State Board of Education Chairman Don McLeroy has finally found a defender in the Texas Senate. Sort of. In a story on KUT radio this morning, Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound, gave something less than a full-throated endorsement of McLeroy’s competence as board chairman:
You’re talking about a chairman and a chairman’s ability to manage a meeting. I have had absolutely no indication that he hasn’t done a good job.
But the accuracy of this claim aside, is this really the best argument McLeroy’s defenders can muster — that he can manage a meeting? What a spectacularly low standard for a position that wields significant influence over the curriculum for 4.6 million schoolchildren (not to mention a multi-billion dollar Permanent School Fund).
If that’s all you’ve got, Sen. Nelson, we respectfully suggest that the state of Texas can do better by its children.
We just got word that Senate Nominations Committee Chairman Mike Jackson, R-La Porte, has given a 24-hour notice on the confirmation of Don McLeroy as Texas State Board of Education chairman. That means we could finally see the long-awaited debate and vote on McLeroy’s controversial appointment Thursday afternoon.
So we decided to offer another example of McLeroy’s contempt for experts and educators. You will recall that McLeroy voted in 2008 to throw out nearly three years of work by teachers and curriculum specialists on new language arts standards. Teachers were appalled, but the esteemed dentist had his own ideas about how to teach students to read and write.
The House Public Education Committee then called a hearing to discuss what in the world was going on with the state board. McLeroy testified at the July 2008 hearing and offered a variety of explanations, including this rather odd one:
A lot of the teachers during public testimony that we had during the public hearings was overwhelming for the workgroup document. I mean, 99 percent of the time, I think. . . . We got a lot of input from teachers. The ones that were the most vocal, by far, I would say ninety, like I say, 99 percent were, uh, I was opposed to. (July 16, 2008, approx. 35:30 mark)
And so he voted against all those teachers. Not only that, he backed a document that was patched together overnight by his board cronies and slipped under hotel doors just an hour before the final vote. And what of the teachers who actually work in the classroom? Who cares, right?
This is yet another of the many examples of why McLeroy’s tenure as chairman has been a disaster for public education in Texas. And it’s another example of why the Texas Senate should reject his confirmation as chairman.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry has signed the only State Board of Education bill to make it out of the Legislature this session. House Bill 772 by state Rep. Donna Howard, D-Austin, requires video and audio Webcasts of state board meetings. The bill takes effect in September of this year.
It’s good that Texas voters will now be able to watch the circus that passes for education policy development at the state board. But it remains deeply disappointing that Republican legislators have let far-right groups and party leaders pressure them into killing other bills that would bring concrete reform to the board and how it conducts business.
Confirmation of Don McLeroy as Texas State Board of Education chairman is indeed on the list of pending nominations for the Senate today. When today’s nominations come to the floor, expect a motion to sever — or remove — McLeroy from the list of other nominees. That will allow the Senate to consider his confirmation separately. You can watch the Senate live on the Internet here. TFN Insider will also be providing updates (and live-blogging, if possible).
2:50 p.m. – It looks like the Texas Senate is about to begin discussion of nominations, including Don McLeroy as chairman of the State Board of Education. You can watch the Webcast here or follow along on TFN Insider.
2:55 - Sen. Leticia Van de Putte, D-San Antonio, moves to sever McLeroy from the nominations list. The request is granted, and the Senate now votes to confirm the entire nominations list except for McLeroy.
2:57 – Sen. Mike Jackson, R-La Porte, chairman of the Senate Nominations Committee, rises to speak for McLeroy. Sen. Jackson basically reads through McLeroy’s resume and then moves for his confirmation.
3:00 – Sen. Van de Putte rises to speak against McLeroy’s confirmation. She notes that she is calling for the rejection of a nomination for the first time in her legislative career: “He’s a decent man. He’s a good man. My opposition to his position as chair has nothing to do with this man of faith and this man, I think, of internal courage and this veteran. My opposition to the chairman of our State Board of Education has to do with his management and leadership style. . . . We’ve been amazed by the divisiveness and the dsyfunctionality of the board.”
3:03 – Sen. Van de Putte: Under McLeroy’s leadership, the state board “has become the laughingstock of the nation.”
3:06 – Sen. Van de Putte goes through a long list of problems that have plagued the state board under McLeroy’s leadership, including divisive “culture war” battles, official actions in violation of state law and disregard for the work of educators and specialists.
The Texas Senate today failed to confirm Don McLeroy as chairman of the State Board of Education. The 19-11 vote fell short of the two-thirds majority needed for confirmation. Texas Freedom Network President Kathy Miller is releasing the following statement:
“Watching the state board the last two years has been like watching one train wreck after another. We had hoped that the Legislature would take more action to put this train back on the tracks, but clearly new leadership on the board was a needed first step. The governor should know that parents will be watching closely to see whether he chooses a new chairman who puts the education of their children ahead of personal and political agendas.”
Rumors about whom Gov. Rick Perry will choose to replace McLeroy as board chairman have been abundant. The state Constitution appears to direct the governor to act immediately to choose a new chairman, but the next board meeting isn’t until July.
Regardless of the governor’s selection for the next chair of the board, our work is not done. With your support, TFN will continue leading the charge for sound education standards, ideology-free textbooks and the best interests of Texas school children.
(f) If an appointee is rejected, the office shall immediately become vacant, and the Governor shall, without delay, make further nominations, until a confirmation takes place. If a person has been rejected by the Senate to fill a vacancy, the Governor may not appoint the person to fill the vacancy or, during the term of the vacancy for which the person was rejected, to fill another vacancy in the same office or on the same board, commission, or other body.
Gov. Rick Perry presumably will choose a fellow Republican to serve as chairman, and that appointee won’t be subject to Senate confirmation until the next time the Legislature is in session. Dallas Republican Geraldine “Tincy” Miller, who served as chairman for two terms ending in 2007, is not eligible to head the board again until 2011. (See Sec. 7.107 of the Texas Education Code.)
Eligible board Republicans include David Bradley of Beaumont Buna, Barbara Cargill of The Woodlands, Cynthia Dunbar of Richmond, Terri Leo of Spring, Gail Lowe of Lampasas and Ken Mercer of San Antonio — all members of the McLeroy faction. The two remaining Republicans are Bob Craig of Lubbock and Pat Hardy of Fort Worth.
The new board chairman will preside over the revision of social studies curriculum standards and the adoption of language arts and possibly science textbooks in the next two years. So any opinions on whom Gov. Perry will (or should) choose?
Far-right groups have consistently and recklessly blamed religious discrimination for the Senate’s failure to confirm the nomination of Don McLeroy as chairman of the Texas State Board of Education.
Don McLeroy’s opponents admitted he was “fair,” but simply did not like his Biblical worldview.Please thank him for his courageous service as SBOE chairman and encourage him to continue to stand for righteousness in the public square.
The message has been sent — if you have sincere religious beliefs, you need not apply to be chair of the State Board of Education.
Even state Sen. Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, suggested that people would see McLeroy’s failure to win confirmation as evidence of a “religious test” for office.
This all is nonsense. As senators who voted against his confirmation repeatedly said, McLeroy is a good, decent man. No one attacked McLeroy’s “Biblical worldview.” His religious beliefs weren’t at issue.
Simply put, McLeroy’s chairmanship failed students, their families and other taxpayers. He has sided with board members who callously disregard the work and advice of teachers, specialists and academic experts. (Examples here and here.) His board failed to adopt and stick to processes that allow for open and informed debate of public policies regarding education. (Example here.) It thumbed its nose at the Legislature, refusing to obey state statutes on textbook adoptions and setting curriculum standards for public school Bible classes. And, frankly, McLeroy has sided with board members and others who have viciously attacked the religious faith of people who don’t oppose teaching the true science of evolution. (Examples here, here, here and here.)
Why are McLeroy’s defenders so recklessly distorting the truth? It’s an old tactic for the religious right: using faith as a weapon to divide Texans for political gain. They believe that persuading some people of faith that their beliefs and rights are under attack — regardless of the truth — will bring rewards at the ballot box in 2010.
It’s a cynical, repulsive political strategy that Texas Freedom Network has been fighting for nearly 15 years.
We thought you might like to see one of the e-mails making the rounds. This is from a Texas religious-righter, who addressed his screed to “Texas Officials” and the “Texas SBOE.”
The “BORKING” of Dr. Don McLeroy … !!!
We have now seen it happen many, many times … a perfectly good and decent person is “Politically Assassinated” by Liberal Democrats for the crime of “NOT being a Liberal Democrat.”
This UGLY, Un-American PATHOLOGY became famous back in 1987 when it was successfully used against Robert Bork on national tv. Because Bork boldly spoke out against Judges who “Legislate from the Bench,” the Liberal Democrats in the US Senate, orchestrated a vicious smear campaign against him and denied him a seat on the US Supreme Court.
Now, the highly partisan Sen. Kirk Watson and Sen. Eliot Shapleigh and the highly partisan TEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK, have successfully brought the Satanic art of “BORKING” to Texas … ; they recently managed to smear Dr. Don McLeroy, a good and decent man, with sickening LIES. This tag-team of DEMONS claimed that Dr. McLeroy tried to force CREATIONISM into the Science Classroom, and they told this brazen LIE over and over again.
The TRUTH is that Dr. McLeroy and the SBOE have simply asked that the SCIENTIFIC METHOD be applied fairly and universally in the Science Classroom; in particular, they have ask that the SCIENTIFIC METHOD even be applied to two SACRED-COWS/RELIGIONS of the Liberal Democrats, namely, (1) Darwinian Evolution and (2) Global Warming.
However, as we all know, the TEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK and its political allies, have responded to the reasonable requirements of the SBOE, with CONTRIVED NEAR-RIOTS at several public hearings. And most recently, as if on cue, the highly partisan Sen. Watson and Sen. Shapleigh have added insult to injury, by blaming these CONTRIVED NEAR-RIOTS of the TFN, on the clearly innocent Dr. McLeroy.
In conclusion, the good and decent people of Texas have at least one very powerful recourse to this insane, demonic BORKING; following the example of St. Paul, we can “spiritually deliver” Sen. Watson and Sen. Shapleigh and the TFN, to their very own evil Leader (1 Cor 5: 4-5; 1 Tim 1: 18-20).
Sunday’s murder of George Tiller, a doctor who performed abortions in Kansas, has brought condemnation from many, including some anti-abortion groups and activists. But not all the “condemnations” have been particularly convincing.
“Tiller the Killer” is dead. Who will mourn for this man? . . . It is not a tragedy that Tiller will never be a killer again. Will anyone argue that it is a tragedy that the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will never again be dishonored by this church-going Sweeney Todd of the medical profession?
The point that must be emphasized over, and over, and over again: pro-life leaders and the pro-life movement are not responsible for George Tiller’s death. George Tiller was a mass-murderer and, horrifically, he reaped what he sowed.
. . . Thank you for coming, unless there’s any other questions. And I truly am sorry that we had to meet under these circumstances. I like Guinness for those of you who want to have a beer somewhere. I prefer my chicken wings really hot and a little crispy.
An e-mail from another activist warned that as congregants at the slain doctor’s church “mop up Tiller’s blood from their foyer floor, let them not forget his blood is also on their hands” for having accepted him into their church.
When it rains, it pours. Last week Don McLeroy failed to win Senate confirmation of his nomination as Texas State Board of Education chairman. Now he’s picked up what could be a very stiff challenge to his re-election next year.
Paul Burka at Texas Monthly is reporting that Thomas Ratliff, son of former lieutenant governor Bill Ratliff, will challenge McLeroy in the 2010 Republican primary.
We are outraged that SBOE Chairman, Don McLeroy, was blocked from confirmation by 11 Democrat Senators. Despite our best efforts to the contrary, the Senate discussion focused on his Christian beliefs and the opinion of the N.Y. Times. Outrageous.
As we have already pointed out, these reckless attempts to manipulate people of faith are cynical and deeply dishonest. (Some might say un-Christian as well.)
One of the most eloquent speeches came from Sen. Kirk Watson, D-Austin. If you don’t have time to watch the full debate, we have an audio file of Sen. Watson’s appeal to his colleagues to put the education of Texas schoolchildren above partisan politics and personal agendas. Click here to listen.
Please take the time to thank Sen. Watson and his colleagues who voted against McLeroy’s confirmation. They stood against continuing efforts to politicize our kids’ education and drag our public schools into the seemingly endless “culture wars.” They put the interests of Texas schoolchildren and their families first. Senators who voted against confirmation were Davis, Ellis, Gallegos, Hinojosa, Shapleigh, Uresti, Van de Putte, Watson, West, Whitmire and Zaffirini. You can find contact information for senators here.
Don McLeroy, recently ousted as Texas State Board of Education chairman, is once again defending new science curriculum standards that dumb down instruction on evolution in public schools. Writing in a Bryan-College Station Eagle op-ed, McLeroy says “only science belongs in science class.” But he then launches once again into a series of creationist attacks on evolution that have been repeatedly and forcefully rejected by mainstream scientists.
McLeroy’s op-ed highlights, as Texas Freedom Network noted in March, the roadmap creationists will use to attack evolution when new science textbooks come up for adoption in two years.
First, McLeroy suggests that students will be able to separate real science from “dogma” — by which he means support for the science of evolution. Then he essentially repeats two key arguments he made during the debate over the standards.
We reported in April that the creationist faction on the Texas State Board of Education was moving to pack a key “expert” review panel for the social studies curriculum revision with like-minded ideologues. (See here and here.) We now have the names of all the “expert” panelists. As with the science “expert” panel, it appears that the social studies panel will be evenly split between mainstream academics and ideologues aligned with the creationist faction.
The three mainstream academics on the panel are Jesus Francisco de la Teja of Texas State University (appointed by SBOE members Rene Nunez, D-El Paso, and Mary Helen Berlanga, D-Corpus Christi), Jim Kracht of Texas A&M (appointed by Pat Hardy, R-Fort Worth, and Bob Craig, R-Lubbock), and Lybeth Hodges (appointed by Mavis Knight, D-Dallas, and Lawrence Allen, D-Houston).
The three ideologues aligned with the board’s creationist faction are David Barton (appointed by Gail Lowe, R-Lampasas, and Ken Mercer, R-San Antonio), the Rev. Peter Marshall (appointed by Barbara Cargill, R-The Woodlands, and Cynthia Dunbar, R-Richmond), and Daniel Dreisbach (appointed by Terri Leo, R-Spring, and David Bradley, R-Beaumont Buna).
SBOE members Don McLeroy, R-College Station; Geraldine “Tincy” Miller, R-Dallas; and Rick Agosto, D-San Antonio, were unable to come to agreement on appointing a seventh panelist.
Even a casual look at the vita for each of these “experts” makes clear grossly unequal qualifications. That examination also reveals the agenda of the board’s creationist faction: use the social studies curriculum to promote a political argument against separation of church and state.
So let’s look at each of the so-called “experts” who will guide the revision of social studies standards for an entire generation of children in Texas public schools.
Let’s see if we have this right. The Texas Legislature adjourned last week without passing legislation to keep five state agencies — including the Texas Department of Transportation and the Texas Department of Insurance — operating after Sept. 1, 2010.
If there are any transportation related issues addressed in the Special Session, then we will want to see the Choose Life License plate on the agenda.
This much should be clear about Texas politics: the radical right — which has the support of the governor — is far more interested in promoting fringe political agendas than in dealing with the real issues that working families care about. Instead of letting lawmakers focus on critical issues like transportation and insurance oversight, right-wingers want yet another divisive, distracting battle over turning license plates into platforms for promoting political agendas.
The same thing is happening in education. State Board of Education debates over curriculum standards increasingly revolve around issues like teaching creationism and attacking church-state separation, not ensuring that Texas students get a 21st-century education.
For the radical right in Texas, it’s always about fueling the “culture wars.”
One of the things you can safely bet on when it comes to the religious right: the worse the fund-raising goes, the more extreme the language gets. Oh sure, it’s not unusual to see nonprofits raise alarm levels in an effort to raise more money. But the religious right seems especially adept (and shameless) in vilifying their vicims, especially gay folks.
Case in point: Vision America, based in the East Texas town of Lufkin.
The Texas Freedom Network has been stepping up efforts to protect the right of families to direct the religious education of their own children as the religious right’s assault on that freedom moves into high gear. The latest example of the right’s increasingly aggressive campaign: an Ohio teacher has filed a lawsuit claiming that public school officials have violated his constitutional and civil rights by trying to stop him from promoting his religious beliefs in the classroom.
School officials in Mount Vernon, Ohio, took action against John Freshwater, an eighth-grade science teacher, after an investigation into a series of incidents. The Columbus Dispatch reports:
In an op-ed column that has run in various newspapers (including in Houston and Austin), Texas Freedom Network President Kathy Miller explains how the recently ended legislative session demonstrates that the “culture wars” are still a divisive and disruptive influence in Texas politics. We are to publishing the op-ed for TFN Insider readers here.
Legislative Session Shows ‘Culture Wars’ Still Thrive in Texas
National elections last November seemed to signal that voters are exhausted by relentless battles over divisive social issues. But the recently ended legislative session showed that the culture wars still thrive in Texas.
We have seen over the past year more public interest in the State Board of Education than at any time since Texas Freedom Network’s founding in 1995. As the board has lurched from one “culture war” battle to another, more and more people have stepped forward to demand that the board stop putting politics ahead of the education of Texas schoolchildren.
The time for politics is during elections. So the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund will sponsor a candidate training for anyone interested in running for a seat on the state board or just wanting to know what it takes to run a winning campaign for the board.
The training, which will be nonpartisan and open to candidates from any political party (or none at all), will be held July 22 in Austin. We will announce time and location as well as registration information soon.
Particpants will learn which state board seats are up for election in 2010 as well as information about campaign planning, messaging and funding. Speakers will include experts with years of experience running — and winning — election campaigns.
That was nonsense. As we noted later, Don McLeroy (who was State Board of Education chairman at the time) had leaked early work from the writing teams to TPPF — work that was nowhere near complete. It seems clear that TPPF’s purpose (and McLeroy’s) was to discredit the work of the writing team members. Most of those team members are hardworking educators and academics who know history and understand quite well how to craft curriculum standards for students.
But not all of them. We have already reported about the ideologues the McLeroy faction on the state board has appointed to a panel of so-called “experts” who will help guide the revision of the social studies standards. It turns out that faction members have also embedded fringe right-wingers on the very curriculum writing teams that they were criticizing last March. Here are three:
The Texas Freedom Network Education Fund’s training for people interested in seeking election to the State Board of Education is now set for 1 -5 p.m., July 22, on the campus of St. Edward’s University in Austin. This nonpartisan training is open to everyone, regardless of political party. People simply interested in learning about what it will take to run a successful state board campaign are also welcome to attend.
The flip side of Obama’s ‘empathy’ is apparent hatred and contempt for white people, traditional families, small business owners, evangelical Christians, conservatives, and everyone else that liberals call the ‘racist, heterosexist, nativist, Christianist, capitalist, homophobic power structure’ in America. In other words, what most of us call normal people. These radical leftists regard folks like you and me and our children as the enemy, and it’s their mission in life to put us in our supposed place, which to them means at the back of the bus. They’re in charge now, and they fully intend to use their power to remake America in their image. If the Senate approves Sotomayor for the Supreme Court, Obama will know that he has carte blanche to escalate his all out war on traditional Americans. . . .
Just how much did creationists gain in the battle over new public school science standards adopted in Texas this spring? Houston Chronicle writer Lisa Falkenberg points to an article from the journal Science that suggests an encouraging answer: not as much as evolution deniers hoped.
As you will recall, creationists on the Texas State Board of Education lost a high-profile battle to require that science students learn phony “weaknesses” of evolution. A majority of board members, backed by countless scientists(including Nobel laureates), successfully opposed that broad requirement. But creationists succeeded in passing other requirements for students to learn pseudoscientific arguments against evolution based on distortions of the fossil record and the complexity of the cell.
The June 12 article in Science, published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, discusses how publishers and textbook authors may be able to use those requirements actually to strengthen instruction on evolution. (The article is locked except for subscribers.) The weight of scientific evidence shows that the creationists’ arguments are nonsense, suggests Kenneth Miller, author of one of the nation’s leading high school biology textbooks. Says Miller:
“The advocates of these (Texas) standards underestimate the strength of the scientific evidence for structures and phenomena that they mistakenly believe evolution cannot account for. The new wording is an opportunity to make biology texts even stronger.”
So, for example, textbooks may simply spend more time discussing how the complexity of the cell supports evolutionary theory. Textbooks can also use discussions of the fossil record to explore the concept of “punctuated equilibrium,” among other topics that are based in sound science.
In short, Miller believes the new Texas science standards can’t force publishers and textbook authors to lie to students, no matter how much creationists might want that to happen.
The controversy over a bill on technology in public school classrooms once again shows that the Texas State Board of Education’s far-right members will fight hard against any policy they perceive as theatening their control over what public school students learn.
On Friday Gov. Rick Perry signed House Bill 4294, a bill by state Rep. Dan Branch, R-Dallas, that would, in part, allow schools districts to use state textbook money to buy laptops and other technology that students could use for electronic instructional materials, such as online textbooks. The bill also establishes procedures for the Texas education commissioner to approve electronic instructional materials that school districts may purchase.
Still not convinced that evolution is a fraud? A press release yesterday from San Antonio-based Vision Forum Ministries promotes “12 new half-hour episodes that disprove popular Darwinist myths in a family radio drama format.” Vision Forum’s president, Doug Phillips, says the the latest episodes of the Jonathan Park Creation Adventure Series show “the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of the much-venerated worldview of Charles Darwin.” More about the series:
“The best-selling Jonathan Park audio drama series follows young Jonathan and his paleontologist family on their adventures around the globe. In ‘Jonathan Park and the Journey Never Taken,’ the Polar Star Medallion mysteriously shows up at the Brenan Museum of Creation, quickly throwing the Creation Response Team into a memorable scavenger hunt. Cryptic clues lead their team to Sweden, Scotland, and beyond in search of a promised treasure. Along the way, they explore the true history of Charles Darwin and his colleagues and learn how these men helped perpetuate the myth of a universe created without a Creator.”
This is the kind of stuff evolution-deniers on the Texas State Board of Education would love to see in science classrooms. The “war on science” marches on.
The US Pastor Council/Texas Pastor Council, which lately has been wading into the waters of electoral politics in Texas, again demonstrates that gay-bashing is one of the religious right’s prominent political weapons. This weekend the Houston-based group sent out a press release attacking Houston city officials for participating in a gay pride event. The group claims that official participation in the event put “the stamp of approval on pedophilia and myriad other sexual disorders.”
The Pastor Council’s grand pooh-bah, Dave Welch, thundered thusly:
“This event promotes and glorifies sexual deviancy that most people find immoral as well as destructive to family and marriage. . . . We will be initiating an open records request to see if one dime of taxpayers’ money was used. We will also certainly communicate to our congregants which of those elected to serve the people chose instead to bow to a narrow and morally depraved special interest group.”
The Pastor Council, which also attacked various corporate sponsors of the event, hasn’t been very subtle about its support for Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s re-election bid next year. And of course, Gov. Perry has scored fairly high in the past on the sneer-o-meter when it comes to gays and lesbians. With the governor charging hard to the right to lock up his base in the Republican primary, don’t be surprised if you see more gay-baiting in coming months.
We wonder whether many of the foot soldiers in the religious-right movement will ever wake up to how they have been used. Over the years we’ve all seen how religious-right pressure groups wade into areas that would seem to have nothing to do with promoting “traditional family values” (whatever that means to them) and other “culture war” issues. Case in point: a group called CRAVE — Christians Reviving America’s Values — is calling on supporters to oppose the Obama administration on health care reform. From a CRAVE press release headlined “America Cannot Afford Health Care” (and quoting the group’s president, Don Swarthout):
What have the uninsured people been doing for health care all of these years? The answer is simple. They have been going to Emergency Rooms to be treated because our laws and the Hippocratic Oath taken by doctors say that they must be treated. . . .
Texas clearly doesn’t have a monopoly on right-wing nonsense. A group of Oklahoma lawmakers is issuing a proclamation that blames gays, abortion supporters and a host of other demons for the nation’s current economic crisis. Really.
The proclamation claims that the nation’s current economic troubles “are consequences of our greater national moral crisis”:
“(T)his nation has become a world leader in promoting abortion, pornography, same sex marriage, sex trafficking, divorce, illegitimate births, child abuse, and many other forms of debauchery . . .”
Then it lays the blame for this moral crisis at the feet of the President Obama for, in part, refusing to participate in a public National Day of Prayer ceremony and for honoring Gay Pride Month (disregarding, the proclamation says, ”the biblical admonitions to live clean and pure lives by proclaiming an entire month to an immoral behavior.”)
The proclamation calls for Christian renewal for the nation and a return to living by biblical principles.
Unlike Kern, apparently, we don’t recall that Lehman Brothers, AIG and a host of other finance powerhouses collapsed last fall because their employees were racing out the door to get abortions or to watch Adam and Steve or Thelma and Louise get hitched.
What most observers expect to be a short special session of the Texas Legislature begins today in Austin. Gov. Rick Perry called the session to deal with lawmakers’ failure this spring to reauthorize the Texas Department of Transportation and four other state agencies scheduled to end operations under the state’s system of periodic Sunset review.
If the governor does not expand the session’s call to other topics, we don’t expect lawmakers to deal with hot-button issues like State Board of Education reform, sex education and stem cell research. Even so, far-right pressure groups have been mobilizing activists. Texas Freedom Network will be ready to act if culture warriors attempt to hijack the session.
The July/August issue ofChurch and State magazine from Americans United for Separation of Church and State has an excellent cover story about David Barton. Barton, you will recall, is the head of the Christian-right group WallBuilders, which argues that separation of church and state is a “myth” and that our laws and society overall should be based on Christian biblical principles (as interpreted by fundamentalists). Barton is also serving as a so-called “expert” guiding the revision of public school social studies curriculum standards in Texas (although he is absurdly unqualified, lacking even minimal academic credentials in the field). (See here and here.)
Money quotes from the Church and State piece:
Perhaps somewhat egotistically, Barton apparently likens himself to a biblical prophet who has been ordained by God to rebuild the religious foundations of the nation.
Barton aims to do that by rediscovering an allegedly lost or suppressed Christian history of America. It’s an odd task for him, because although he poses as a historian, Barton isn’t one. . . .
A Texas Freedom Network Education Fund report released in February revealed that more than nine in 10 Texas school districts teach students nothing about responsible pregnancy and disease prevention when it comes to sex except for abstinence-only-until-marriage. One of the most common strategies in abstinence-only curricula, the study’s authors found, was wildly exaggerating the failure rate of condoms as a way to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. The goal of those programs, of course, is to persuade students that the only way to protect themselves is is through abstinence.
Countless medical studies have shown this approach to be fear-mongering fiction, not responsible education. Now we have another example — the fight against AIDS in Haiti:
In the early 1980s, when the strange and terrifying disease showed up in the U.S. among migrants who had escaped Haiti’s dictatorship, experts thought it could wipe out a third of the country’s population.
Instead, Haiti’s HIV infection rate stayed in the single digits, then plummeted.
In a wide range of interviews with doctors, patients, public health experts and others, The Associated Press found that Haiti’s success in the face of chronic political and social turmoil came because organizations cooperated and tailored programs to the country’s specific challenges.
Much of the credit went to two pioneering nonprofit groups, Boston-based Partners in Health and Port-au-Prince’s GHESKIO, widely considered to be the world’s oldest AIDS clinic.
“The Haitian AIDS community feels like they’re out in front of everyone else on this, and pretty much they are,” said Judith Timyan, senior HIV/AIDS adviser for the U.S. Agency for International Development in Haiti. “They really do some of the best work in the world.”
Researchers say the number of suffers was initially lessened by closing private blood banks, and statistically by high mortality rates — an untreated AIDS sufferer in Haiti lives eight fewer years than an untreated American.
Well-coordinated use of AIDS drugs, education and behavioral changes such as increased condom use have kept the disease from surging back, at least for now.
Meanwhile, education campaigns spread the word on prevention measures. More than 51 million free condoms have been shipped to the country of since 2004 and are advertised everywhere on street murals and corner store signs. (emphasis added)
“More Haitians know about modes of transmission than high school students in the U.S.,” Pape said. (Dr. Jean W. Pape is co-founder GHESKIO.)
The article notes that Haiti still faces substantial hurdles in fighting AIDS, but ignorance isn’t one of them. On the other hand, in Texas — which has one of the highest teen birth rates in the nation — keeping teens ignorant is the preferred strategy in most public schools. And religious-right pressure groups did a lot to keep that strategy in place during the last legislation session.
Look, we were under no illusions when the Texas Senate wisely rejected the confirmation of Don McLeroy as board chair in May. We knew Gov. Rick Perry would likely choose another member of the board’s far-right faction as chair (even though there are other far more responsible conservative Republicans on the board). After all, the far-right faction represents his electoral base, which he will need in his re-election battle next year.
But surely even the governor realizes that choosing an extremist like Dunbar would be almost inconceivably reckless and irresponsible. Dunbar has clearly expressed her loathing for public education in her book One Nation Under God,calling public schools a “tool of perversion,” “unconstitutional” and “tryannical.” She has also personally rejected the public school system, home-schooling her children. In fact, she wrote in her book that sending our children to public schools is “throwing them into the enemy’s flames even as the children of Israel threw their children to Moloch.”
By appointing Dunbar, Gov. Perry would be sending a clear message that he shares Dunbar’s extremism and her contempt for public education. He would be putting his political fortunes ahead of the education of nearly 5 million Texas schoolchildren. In short, such an appointment would be a shocking betrayal of all those children and their families.
We hope Gov. Perry won’t do something so cynical and self-serving. Frankly, we believe he’s better than that. With the next state board meeting set for July 14-17, we will likely find out soon whether we’re wrong about that.
It didn’t take long for the absurdly unqualified ideologues appointed to a social studies curriculum panel by the Texas State Board of Education to start playing politics with our kids’ education. Two far-right members of the so-called “expert” panel guiding the curriculum revision are demanding that César Chavez — the renowned community and labor organizer and civil rights leader — be stricken from the standards because they say he’s not the right kind of role model for students.
That’s only one of the problems with the “expert” reviews of the current social studies standards provided to the Texas Education Agency last week by the panelists. The panel is made up of six members, including a trio of mainstream academics from Texas universities. The others include political activist David Barton of Texas and evangelical minister Peter Marshall of Massachusetts, who used their reviews to criticize the inclusion of Chavez and other historical figures they consider inappropriate. In addition, they and fellow panelist Daniel Dreisbach of American University make lengthy arguments that the Founders intended to create a distinctly Christian American nation based on biblical principles. That contention conflicts with multiple rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court and sharply differs with the research of most scholars. In fact, mainstream scholars point out that the Founders sought to protect the religious freedom of citizens by keeping the affairs of government and religious institutions separate.
But let’s consider first what we fear might become a growing “blacklist” of historical figures, especially Chavez, social conservatives find objectionable.
One of the Ten Commandments forbids lying, but far-right pressure groups seem to think it doesn’t apply to them. Mistruths are plentiful in their campaign to get Cynthia Dunbar named chair of the Texas State Board of Education. The biggest lie is that opponents of her appointment are discriminating against Dunbar because of her religious beliefs. A spokesperson for one fringe group says Dunbar’s critics “oppose religious freedom, particularly Christian conservatives.”
That dishonest line of attack is simply an attempt to distract Texans from the truth: Dunbar, who has homeschooled her own children, shouldn’t be chair of the state board because she hates public schools. They are, she says, “unconstitutional,” “tyrannical,” and “tools of perversion.” Those are her own words. The fact is most people would also oppose an agriculture commissioner who despises farmers or a surgeon general who denounces modern medicine.
Moreover, her own supporters have have made it crystal clear that they think anyone who disagrees with them isn’t a real Christian. See, for example, here, here, here and here. That kind of arrogance and self-righteousness is nauseating. So is lying to people while using faith as a weapon to divide Texans for political gain.
McLeroy is quoted in a Dallas Morning News story about reviews of the current standards by David Barton of WallBuilders and conservative evangelical minister Peter Marshall. Barton has earned only a bachelor’s degree in religious education. Marshall also has no graduate work in the social sciences. But both are prominent political activists among far-right evangelicals.
Despite their absurdly weak credentials, McLeroy told the Dallas Morning News he thinks Barton and Marshall are “very qualified” to sit on an “expert” panel guiding the revision of the social studies standards:
“There is no doubt they have the experience and expertise to advise the writing teams and the board on the standards,” he said, noting he has not yet read the experts’ recommendations.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry has just appointed Gail Lowe, R-Lampasas, as chairman of the State Board of Education. Lowe will replace Don McLeroy, whose nomination as chairman the state Senate rejected in May.
In a press release announcing the appointment. Gov. Perry expressed confidence “that through her leadership, we will continue to ensure that Texans receive the educational foundation necessary to be successful in college, the workplace and beyond.”
Far-right pressure groups had been pushing for the appointment of Cynthia Dunbar, who has called public education “unconstitutional,” “tyrannical” and a “tool of perversion.”
We’ll have more soon.
UPDATE:
Texas Freedom Network President Kathy Miller is releasing the following statement regarding Gov. Rick Perry’s appointment today of Gail Lowe as the new chair of the State Board of Education.
“It’s disappointing that instead of choosing a mainstream conservative who could heal the divisions on the board, the governor once again appointed someone who repeatedly has put political agendas ahead of the education of Texas schoolchildren. Ms. Lowe has marched in lockstep with a faction of board members who believe that their personal beliefs are more important than the experience and expertise of teachers and academics who have dedicated their careers to educating our children and helping them succeed. We can only hope that she will rise above her history on the board and as chair keep the board from continuing to hold the education of our children hostage to divisive ‘culture war’ battles.”
Lowe’s record on the State Board of Education includes:
In 2004 Ms. Lowe opposed requiring that publishers obey curriculum standards and put medically accurate information about responsible pregnancy and disease prevention in new high school health textbooks.
In 2008 Ms. Lowe voted to throw out nearly three years of work by teacher writing teams on new language arts standards. Over the strenuous objections of teachers and curriculum specialists, Lowe instead voted for a standards document that the board’s far-right bloc patched together overnight and slipped under hotel doors the morning of the final vote.
In 2003 and 2009 Ms. Lowe supported dumbing down the state’s public school science curriculum by voting to include unscientific, creationist criticisms of evolution in science textbooks and curriculum standards.
THIRD UPDATE: Read an earlier post from TFNInsider about Lowe, highlighting her highly politicized agenda for public schools (including global warming denial and shoe-horning lots of supposedly “conservative values” into the classroom).
If you wondered if the appointment of Gail Lowe, R-Lampasas, as new State Board of Education chair signals a new direction for the embattled board, Lowe’s fellow board member — and fellow culture warrior — Terri Leo, R-Spring, has an answer for you:
“Philosophically I believe she is the most conservative SBOE member. We tease her, that if we are not voting with Gail we need to check our conservative compasses.”
Gail Lowe might not decry public schools as the tool of the devil (a la Cynthia Dunbar), but her record on the board makes clear that she shares Dunbar’s primary objective — to push her religious and political agenda into Texas classrooms. She’ll just do it with a smile instead of a sneer.
“Certainly those are historical figures that students should be aware of, and their goals and their place in history, but it needs to be in the context of what those people were known for. And so if the example is someone of good civic involvement, then there may be a different type of historical figure and leader that would be more appropriate.” (This is Lowe’s actual quote. The written version of the quote on the KERA Web page is incomplete.)
Now think about Lowe’s comment for a minute. She is suggesting that Chavez and Marshall are not appropriate examples of “good civic involvement”? Good grief. Chavez and Marshall built their careers on and are revered for working to tear down barriers to civic and democratic involvement by people who had long been shut out of the corridors of influence and power. We are not suggesting that they are the only appropriate examples of “good civic involvement.” But the two are surely among the most important modern historical examples.
Moreover, Barton and weren’t simply suggesting that Chavez and Marshall aren’t appropriate examples in the context of where they appeared in the standards. Recall what Marshall said about Chavez:
“Chavez is hardly the kind of role model that ought to be held up to our children as someone worthy of emulation.”
Marshall isn’t calling for Chavez to be put somewhere else. He’s calling for his removal, period. He and Barton simply don’t like the political views Chavez had or the work that he did.
This is just the first of what are likely to be many steps down a perilous path toward politicizing the social studies education of Texas schoolchildren. Lowe knows that. In fact, she is helping facilitate it. And her appointment as chair is very troubling.
Popular MSNBC host Keith Olbermann turned his withering gaze to Texas last Friday, excoriating Governor Rick Perry for even considering public school-hater Cynthia Dunbar for chair of the state’s Board of Education. Dunbar’s outlandish comments landed the governor the top spot on Olbermann’s “Worst Person in the World” list.
Though the timing is a bit unfortunate — since Gov. Perry passed over Dunbar and appointed Gail Lowe as the new chair last Friday — the larger issue this clip highlights remains salient. The Texas State Board of Education continues to make national headlines for all the wrong reasons. The serious toll on textbooks and curriculum aside, the damage to the state’s national image is impossible to deny at this point. The embarrassment the actions of this board and those on it have brought to Texas over these past few years has been a PR disaster for the state.
The religious right’s campaign against a stronger federal law on hate crimes has increasingly been, well, hateful. An e-mail blast from one Texas-based pressure group this morning calls on recipients to express
“opposition to the pending hate crimes legislation, also known as the “Pedophile Protection Act” due to its inclusion of pedophiles as a protected class under the proposal that protects homosexuals from hate crimes.”
We’ve seen a lot of far-right e-mails about the proposed hate crimes legislation in Congress. Over time the venomous language attacking it has evolved. At first was the absurd suggestion that clergy preaching against homosexuality would fill our nation’s jails if the legislation passed. The increasingly prominent message in recent months equates homosexuality with pedophilia.
“We’re in an all-out moral and spiritual civil war for the soul of America, and the record of American history is right at the heart of it.”
Of course, the enemy in that war is anyone — even fellow Christians — who don’t share Marshall’s personal religious and political beliefs. Marshall has made that very clear.
The mix of intolerance and violent imagery employed by Marshall and others of the religious right is as extreme today as when the movement’s shock troops declared a “culture war” in America nearly two decades ago. That kind of hyperbolic nonsense is something Texans will hear more and more over the coming months. That’s because the state board also put another far-right political activist, David Barton, on the “expert” social studies panel.
Never mind that Marshall and Barton are absurdly unqualified to be considered experts by any objective standards. Barton, who founded an organization that opposes separation of church and state, has a bachelor’s degree in religious education. Marshall also has no advanced degree in the social sciences. In truth, their “expertise” is in promoting political agendas, not social studies education.
But don’t bother suggesting that state board members choose only “experts” who actually have relevant academic qualifications that make them experts. Too many of those board members think real scholarship is suspect — another example of the anti-intellectualism rampant among the religious right.
Don McLeroy, ousted from his post as board chair by the state Senate in May, tells the Austin American-Statesmanthat he likes things the way things are now — the only requirement for being an “expert” is that two board members say so:
“If two (board) members think they’re qualified, they’re qualified.”
Golly, such high standards for Texas. But hey, we’re in a “war for the soul of America,” right?
Terri Leo, R-Spring, and her allies on the board insisted that the reviewers were only stating their opinions and that there was no organized effort to censor liberals and minorities in the standards. Ms. Leo, in fact, indignantly criticized “the media’s huge ‘knee-jerk’ reaction when this process hasn’t even started yet.”
“The map demonstrates that Antarctica had been extensively explored and mapped long before it was known to the Western world. Since Antarctica was much warmer when some of the source-maps were drawn than it is today, the theory that man-made carbon dioxide emissions are the primary cause of climate change must be given up.”
So there you have it. All of the world’s best climate scientists can finally turn their attention to something else. And the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in August can be cancelled. Quist has a map showing they’re all wrong! And to think that Texas students won’t be benefitting from this man’s genius…
“(V)ery little of what I’ve been reading about the Texas BOE seems to convey just how dangerous Barton really is. His agenda for the teaching of American history is not merely a somewhat more religious ‘interpretation’ of history, as some are describing it — it’s an all out, lie packed, completely revised, Christian nationalist version of history, designed to muster support for a very clear political agenda.”
The bizarre (and long discredited) claims that President Obama isn’t a U.S. citizen keep coming from the far right. So is Texas-based Vision America, a religious-right organization headed by Rick Scarborough in Lufkin, now jumping off the crazy cliff? Seems that way.
In an e-mail — signed by Scarborough — to supporters today, the organization charges that the president is trying to keep the truth from the American people:
To date, though numerous requests have been made, the President has not provided proof of his citizenship. The Constitutionality of the current President of the United States is brought into question, and this simply cannot remain unchallenged.
In May we reported that a member of a social studies curriculum writing team was complaining about an “overrepresentation of minorities” in the curriculum standards. That member, Bill Ames, is a political activist appointed by Don McLeroy, who at the time was chairman of the Texas State Board of Education. Now a teacher, Kimberly Griffith, who is also a member of one of the social studies writing teams, weighs in on Mr. Ames’ comments in a response in the same thread. Our original post and the comments from Mr. Ames and Ms. Griffith are available here.
We are noting the exchange between Mr. Ames and Ms. Griffith because it has become clear — based also on comments made by state board members and by so-called “experts” appointed by those board members — that what our public schools teach about the contributions of minorities in American history will be a key topic of debate in the revision of the social studies curriculum. Frankly, we are seeing an irresponsible and deceptive campaign by social conservatives on and off the state board to persuade the general public that “radicals” are somehow using “political correctness” and “multiculturalism” to water down the social studies curriculum and undermine patriotism.
Three cheers for Ms. Griffith and other hard-working teachers in this state who are trying to do their jobs despite the far right’s efforts to politicize their classrooms.
Texas has an abundance of religious-righters who send countless e-mails circulating throughout the internets. We don’t want to give specific ranters publicity by identifying them, but we will occasionally post examples of their nonsense to show the kind of extremism that passes for discourse on the far right.
Today we note an e-mail attacking proposed congressional legislation that would expand protections under the federal hate-crime law to those attacked because of their sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability. The Senate added this measure to the defense appropriations bill last week. Just before the Senate vote on the measure, this serial e-mailer (with apparently a rather long list of recipients) recycled many of the talking points far-right pressure groups have been using to try to defeat it:
“If the Senate approves the Hate Crimes bill (an amendment added to the Defense budget bill) and it becomes the law of the land, here is a practical scenario that could occur:
If a sexual pervert were having sex with my dog (bestiality) in my backyard and I did something violent to stop the pervert, I could be charged and convicted of committing a hate crime and would receive a longer prison sentence than if the pervert had gone next door and beaten up a little old lady.”
Sigh. The proposed measure has nothing to do with bestiality or anyone legitimately defending themselves or property against a crime. She continues:
“The House Hate Crimes bill (H. R. 913 — already passed on 4.29.09) and the current Senate Hate Crimes bill (S. B. 909) do not define what ’sexual orientation’ means, is based upon whatever the victim ‘perceives,’ and does not exclude bizarre sexual activities (e.g., bestiality, pedophilia, incest, sexual sadism, voyeurism, sexual masochism, transgenderism, exhibitionism, etc.).
“As used in this section, the term ‘sexual orientation’ means consensual homosexuality or heterosexuality.”
As such, sexual orientation does not include bestiality, pedophilia, or anything else. But that doesn’t stop the lies.
Second, the legislation isn’t “based on whatever the victim ‘perceives.’” The legislation addresses crimes “motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim.” The focus is on the perpetrator’s perception of the victim.
Third, the claim that the measure “does not exclude bizarre sexual activities” is ludicrous. The bill doesn’t explicitly “exclude” such practices because the statute couldn’t be legitimately interpreted as including them in the first place. We noted earlier this month that far-right opponents are disingenuously trying to kill the hate crimes measure by linking homosexuality to things, like pedophilia, that most people find objectionable. But lies, distortions and fear have become the primary political weapons of the far right.
Far-right members of the Texas State Board of Education continue to protest that they aren’t trying to politicize the revision of social studies curriculum standards for public schools. But their actions don’t match their denials.
In the e-mail exchange, which we obtained through a Texas Public Information Act request, state board member Barbara Cargill, R-The Woodlands, out-of-the-blue asks the applicant:
“Would you consider yourself a conservative when it comes to patriotism, the constitution, the heritage of our forefathers, etc.?”
The Texas Freedom Network (TFN), a statewide, nonprofit organization located in Austin, seeks a full-time Office Manager/Administrator. The Texas Freedom Network advances a mainstream agenda of religious freedom and individual liberties to counter the religious right.
The Office Manager/Administrator will work closely with all TFN staff and will report to the President. The ideal candidate for this position will have the ability to organize, coordinate, and manage the financial and administrative aspects of day-to-day operations for TFN (i.e. to make the trains run on time and ensure that the numbers all match up!). Responsibilities will involve many facets of the organization’s administrative operations, including:
Provide for proper fiscal record-keeping and reporting, including the preparation of financial statements for the President and Board of Directors, in accordance with standard accounting principles and the financial policies and procedures of the organization
Manage the day-to-day financials, including banking, paying bills, managing payroll, balancing accounts, tracking revenue and expenditures, and producing financial reports
Coordinate as needed with accounting firm and bookkeeper for monthly financial reconciliation, annual audits and tax filings for all TFN affiliated entities
Coordinate Board of Directors meetings, correspondence with board members, minutes of board meetings and committee meetings
Coordinate human resource processes, maintain up-to-date orientation materials for new employees, maintain benefits and healthcare accounts, track leave accrual, research and inform staff of training opportunities, manage weekly staff meetings and coordinate staff retreats
Create and maintain staff calendar
Assist the President with correspondence, scheduling, travel reservations, and filing
Oversee maintenance of office, including upkeep of building and grounds
Ensure maintenance of all office equipment
Procure sufficient office supplies
Act as principal liaison with all vendors
Act as the primary contact for visitors and answering the phones
Assist with logistics for fundraising and outreach events
Some travel and working long and/or irregular hours are required.
EXPERIENCE REQUIRED: Applicants must have at least two years of professional administrative experience, including financial management; be well organized, resourceful and attentive to details; possess excellent verbal and written communication skills; and demonstrate a commitment to the mission and goals of the organization. Applicants must be highly motivated self-starters who are able to work independently and in a team environment. Proficiency with QuickBooks, Microsoft Word, Excel and Access is required.
COMPENSATION: Annual salary commensurate with experience; benefits include health and dental insurance, 401(k) plan, generous paid vacation, personal leave and holidays.
TO APPLY: Fax resume and at least three references to employment@tfn.org by 5:00 p.m., Friday, August 7.
The Texas Freedom Network is an equal-opportunity employer and minority candidates are encouraged to apply.
Texas isn’t the only state witnessing a campaign to baptize (and rewrite) early American history. A group in Florida calling themselves No Separation has begun purchasing billboard space to spread their message that:
Our Founding Fathers knew that America’s government was made only for people who are moral and religious. It’s not suited for governing anyone else.
The billboards feature quotes from early American leaders that, taken out of context, would seem to denounce the separation of church and state. Only it turns out that this propaganda isn’t just misleading; it’s outright false! One of the quotes attributed to George Washington is completely fabricated. According to the billboard, Washington proclaimed,
“It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.”
But Washington, of course, never said that. So the billboard sponsors acted quickly to correct their error. Well…not exactly. When confronted with this lie, a spokesperson for the group articulated a rather flexible view of historical accuracy:
“I don’t believe there’s a document in Washington’s handwriting that has those words in that specific form. However, if you look at Washington’s quotes, including his farewell address, about the place of religion in the political sphere, there’s no question he could have said those exact words.”
Ah, yes. The old “he-COULD-have-said-it defense” — a tactic that never got me very far with my history teachers. But then again, this guy is making a compelling case for a spot on the Texas social studies expert review panel. After all, the No Separation Web site points to none other than SBOE “expert” David Barton’s Wallbuilders as a “fantastic resource for information on America’s Christian heritage.” But Barton has acknowledged on his own Web site having attributed that quote to Washington even though he can’t back up the claim that the nation’s first president actually said it. It is one of nearly a dozen quotes Barton has inaccurately attributed to the nation’s Founders in his misguided campaign to persuade Americans that separation of church and state is a “myth.”
“End Times” theology has played a disturbingly prominent role in the religious right. The concept of an apocalyptic, divinely guided end of the world is a common feature in preaching by religious-right leaders like Tim LaHaye of the violent Left Behind series and San Antonio mega-pastor John Hagee. Even Peter Marshall, appointed by the Texas State Board of Education to a panel of so-called “experts” helping revise the public school social studies curriculum, dabbles in it.
Incredibly, President George W. Bush told French President Jacques Chirac in early 2003 that Iraq must be invaded to thwart Gog and Magog, the Bible’s satanic agents of the Apocalypse.
Honest. This isn’t a joke. The president of the United States, in a top-secret phone call to a major European ally, asked for French troops to join American soldiers in attacking Iraq as a mission from God.
Now out of office, Chirac recounts that the American leader appealed to their “common faith” (Christianity) and told him: “Gog and Magog are at work in the Middle East…. The biblical prophecies are being fulfilled…. This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins.”
This bizarre episode occurred while the White House was assembling its “coalition of the willing” to unleash the Iraq invasion. Chirac says he was boggled by Bush’s call and “wondered how someone could be so superficial and fanatical in their beliefs.”
State Board of Education member Don McLeroy, R-Bryan, is clearly not going to let the Senate’s decision to strip him of his chairmanship relegate him to the back-bench for the debate on social studies standards. This week McLeroy came out swinging on the question of religion’s role in U.S. history. Responding to an open letter to the state board by the American Humanist Association, McLeroy sent the group an essay he wrote way back in 2002 (when social studies textbook were last up for adoption) entitled “The Gift of Medieval Christendom to the World.” (Hat tip: Kate Alexander at the Austin American Statesman.) Some excerpts:
What is it about the development of the West that made it so remarkable and unique? Why in the West are all people important? What is the ultimate source of these ideals of freedom, equality and limited government?
…
I believe the best and really only answer to all the above questions is the gradual assimilation of Judeo-Christianity in the West. By arguing that humankind is “made in the image of God”, medieval thinkers developed the idea of the dignity of the individual, not something arbitrary– man-given, but a reality, inherent in every person — God-given.
This leads McLeroy — in his scholarly opinion as a historianphilosopheranthropologist dentist — to the following conclusion:
Freedom is unique to the areas of the world that have been touched by Christianity.
And since McLeroy knows that correlation does not equal causation, he offers his take on why this is so:
I argue that the development of medieval political structures with their limiting of the power of the governments and the resulting freedom for commerce, and the freeing or releasing of human energy coincides with the assimilation of the ideas of the dignity of the human being—“created in the image of God”. This was a gift of the spread of Christianity in Europe, or as many call it “Christendom”.
McLeroy also directed the Humanist Association to his recent appearance on Fox News. Watch McLeroy banter with the Fox News host and explain his puzzling assertion that the U.S. Constitution “recognizes man as a sinner” after the jump. Read the rest of this entry »
Once again, Texas educators are pushing back against efforts to politicize the state’s public school classrooms. Texas Freedom Network’s reviews of the first drafts of proposed new social studies curriculum standards revealed some encouraging signs. In most cases, the teachers, academics and other community members on the curriuclum writing teams refused to bow to far-right pressure to inject political agendas into history, geography and other social studies classrooms.
We have many times noted (one example) disingenuous claims by creationists that their attacks on teaching about evolution in public school science classrooms have nothing to do with religion. Now anti-evolution pooh-bah William Dembski offers more evidence that those claims are little more than misleading propaganda.
- One course requires “a 3,000-word essay on the theological significance of intelligent design (worth 30% of your grade).”
- The same course also requires students to ”develop a Sunday-school lesson plan based on the book Understanding Intelligent Design (worth 20% of your grade).”
- At least two courses require students to make “at least 10 posts defending ID” on “hostile” Web sites (worth 20 percent of the students’ grades).
So a significant requirement to pass Dembski’s classes is to engage in a propaganda campaign to “prove” that “intelligent design” is based in science and not religion. Never mind that Dembski’s classes themselves prove that this propaganda campaign is simply a lie.
Paul writes:
These are courses in Christian apologetics, a term which means the philosophical defense of a religious viewpoint. Here is perhaps the most blatant admission you will ever see (by one of the preeminent “scientific” thinkers on ID) that Intelligent Design is, in fact, a religious concept and NOT a scientific one. Why else would it be taught in a class on apologetics? Why are there no other courses in apologetics that have an (allegedly) scientific idea as the core concept of the course?
We say it again: everyone has the right to his or her own religious beliefs about creation and any other topic, and Texas Freedom Network will continue to defend the right of all people to practice their faith as they see fit. But public schools have no business deciding whose religious beliefs to teach in science classrooms. Dembski and his fellow travelers don’t agree. They want to use public schools as tools to promote their religious beliefs over those of everyone else. TFN will continue to stand firmly against that.
The Texas Freedom Network has taken no position on national health insurance reform, but we have been fascinated by the torrent of e-mails from religious-right pressure groups opposed to it. Oh, we’re not surprised that the religious right opposes reform — the movement’s leadership has long been in bed with economic and ”small government” conservatives (even when they’re trying to dictate how people live their private lives). What’s fascinating is that so many who piously proclaim their Christian faith are so disingenuous and deceitful in their statements about health insurance reform and so supportive of the rude and uncivil behavior of some reform opponents.
Texas-based groups on the far right have even promoted videos of disruptive protesters shouting and jeering members of Congress trying to answer questions about reform at “town hall” meetings. When others object to the shouts and deliberate disruptions, those same far-right groups claim the right to free speech — all the while ignoring efforts to drown out the speech of reform supporters at the meetings.
Nationally, religious-right pressure groups have launched aggressive fund-raising and disinformation campaigns targeting health care reform. Many of their statements echo charges about things like “death panels,” euthanasia and “pulling the plug” on Grandma. Some examples:
We warned repeatedly during the recent debate over science curricuclum standards that Texas was in danger of falling behind the rest of the nation in science education. Now a new study to be published in the journal Evolution: Education and Outreach confirms our warnings.
Texas State Board of Education Chairwoman Gail Lowe has some peculiar views when it comes to teaching students about good citizenship. In her view, labor leader César Chavez and civil rights champion and former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall aren’t good role models for that.
Marshall and Chavez are “not particularly known for their citizenship,” Lowe said. “Figures we use to represent those character ideals (citizenship, patriotism and community involvement) and the type of persons we want your students to emulate should be politically neutral.”
Neutral about what? Racial segregation in public schools? Voting rights? The right of people to organize and campaign for better working and living conditions? The heroes of the American Revolution weren’t “neutral” about people organizing and fighting against tyranny. Abraham Lincoln wasn’t “neutral” about the inhumanity and injustice of slavery. Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott weren’t “neutral” on the civil and political rights of women. Are none of them appropriate role models for “good citizenship”? Is Ms. Lowe herself “neutral” on any of these issues? Is anyone?
The Associated Press article doesn’t include any examples of “good citizens” Lowe has for inclusion in the public school social studies curriculum standards, which the state board is currently revising. So we’ll wait to find out whether those individuals would be considered “neutral” on issues like racial and voting discrimination and the rights of citizens to organize and fully participate in our government and society.
One thing should be clear now to everyone, however. Lowe’s appointment as chair of the state board is no improvement over the chairmanship of Don McLeroy. The education of Texas schoolchildren will still be held hostage by far-right ideologues with personal and political axes to grind.
“Most members of our board are people of faith, only some of us have a faith that is attacked, singled out because of the types of churches we go to,” said Lowe, who grew up in the Methodist Church but is now active in a small nondenominational church in Lampasas. “Religious expression is something that has been deemed very important, but I don’t believe in either the science curriculum or in social studies, we are pushing a particular religious belief system.”
Texas Freedom Network founder Cecile Richards, who currently serves as president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, will be featured at one of three TFN Faith and Freedom Speaker Series events beginning in September. Cecile’s San Antonio speech on September 14 will be followed on September 24 by an Austin event featuring nationally syndicated columnist E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post and a Nov. 5 speech in Dallas by Charles Haynes of the First Amendment Center.
Cecile, the daughter of former Texas governor Ann Richards, founded TFN in 1995 and served as our executive director for three years. Dionne is an award-winning columnist, author and commentator on politics and faith. Haynes is senior scholar at the First Amendment Center, which works to preserve and protect First Amendment freedoms — speech, press, religion and the rights to assemble and to petition government.
The religious right’s tactics seem to have become ever more extreme in the past year. Today an organization with the credible-sounding name of The Center For Bio-Ethical Reform (CBR) used the Christian Newswire service to blast out a press release suggesting President Obama is a deranged murderer of “preborn children.”
The e-mail plays off the widely discredited and preposterous charge that proposed health insurance reform would allow government to withhold care for the elderly and infirm while paying for abortions. Says the group’s director, Gregg Cunningham:
“Americans don’t want to pay for mandatory insurance which defines baby-killing as ‘essential care.’ They are turning against ‘end-of-life’ counseling which is more coercive than consultative. It is becoming increasingly clear that this horrifying plan is designed to reduce the numbers of preborn children who could ruin their parents’ careers and the numbers of elderly parents who might spoil their children’s retirements.”
But it gets worse.
Cunningham urges supporters to send the White House e-mails that include an illustration (provided by the group) showing President Obama made up to look like the deranged Joker (from a Batman movie). The Obama/Joker character’s bloody hand is wielding a scalpel over the picture of a dismembered fetus. (We have no intention of posting such a vile illustration here.)
The press release continues:
“(T)he president needs to see this poster and he needs to hear from every American who opposes the publicly funded abortion and end-of-life health care rationing which will result from the plan which Mr. Obama and his socialist friends are trying to ram down our throats.”
We have a hard time believing that most religious conservatives would approve of these kinds of depraved tactics. But the religious right continues to redefine the meaning of “extremism.”
In truth, it’s a bit more complicated that Olbermann suggests. First, the law on Bible classes is a product of the Texas Legislature in 2007, not a requirement of the State Board of Education. The Texas Freedom Network succeeded in getting the legislation amended so that public schools would not be required to offer separate courses about the Bible. The Texas attorney general has said, however, that the law requires public high schools to provide instruction about the Bible’s influence in history and literature somewhere in the curriculum.
TFN also succeeded in getting various safeguards for religious freedom in the bill. Those safeguards, if obeyed, would keep instruction about the Bible from turning into opportunities to evangelize in public schools.
Still, the State Board of Education deserves a heap of criticism. One of the law’s key safeguards for religious freedom is a requirement that the state board adopt specific curriculum standards for schools that choose to offer Bible courses. The purpose of that requirement is to provide guidance to schools on how to teach about the Bible’s influence in history and literature without turning public schools into Sunday schools. But the state board threw school disricts under the bus by deliberately adopting vague, very general guidelines that offer no help for districts trying to create appropriate courses. No surprise.
It’s been a busy year for the Texas Freedom Network: battling far-right extremism on the State Board of Education, promoting responsible sexuality education for Texas teens, defeating private school voucher schemes and efforts to undermine stem cell research in the Legislature, defending religious freedom and separation of church and state. But all we’ve accomplished would not be possible without the generous help of our members and other supporters. And now it’s time to celebrate our accomplishments with all of you.
This year’s event features the laugh-out-loud antics of National Comedy Theatre, live music by Sticks & Stones, shopping at our incredible silent auction, delicious hors d’oeuvres from local caterers and a special award ceremony.
Click here to learn more and to sponsor this year’s event. ( To be listed on the invitation, please contribute or pledge your support by Friday, August 21.) And please make sure to say hello to staff when you come. We look forward to meeting the folks who help us continue the work we do on behalf of mainstream values — strong neighborhood public schools, religious freedom and individual liberties for all.
A variety of studies in recent years have revealed that private school voucher schemes don’t live up to their promises of giving families better options and improving public schools through competition. Now a new study reveals that private schools most available to the low-income families that vouchers are supposed to help tend not to offer academic benefits over public schools.
In short, the report reveals that the cost and quality of private schools is strongly associated with the religious affiliation of the schools. Non-Catholic Christian schools tend to cost the least, but those schools also tend to pay teachers the least, have teachers with the weakest academic records, have higher student-to-teacher ratios, and have the lowest student test scores. According to the study, Catholic schools tend to approximate public schools in those categories.
More expensive private schools — many of them Hebrew and independent (generally not religiously affiliated) day schools — typically spend more on education resources, but often their tuition costs aren’t even close to covered by vouchers (which typically are worth about the cost of educating a student in public schools). As a result, many of those better-performing private schools remain out of the reach of even low-income families with vouchers.
So what does this mean? Vouchers often take money from neighborhood schools to pay tuition at nonpublic schools that typically don’t do a better job educating their students. Worse, as the Texas Freedom Network has repeatedly pointed out, those voucher schools don’t have to meet the same standards as public schools and are unaccountable to taxpayers. Such a deal, right?
Texas high school students would learn about such significant individuals and milestones of conservative politics as Newt Gingrich and the rise of the Moral Majority — but nothing about liberals — under the first draft of new standards for public school history textbooks.
And the side that got left out is very unhappy.
As it stands, students would get “one-sided, right wing ideology,” said Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer, D-San Antonio, chairman of the House Mexican American Caucus.
“We ought to be focusing on historical significance and historical figures. It’s important that whatever course they take, that it portray a complete view of our history and not a jaded view to suit one’s partisan agenda or one’s partisan philosophy,” he said.
The distinguished legislator is absolutely right, of course. The last thing most parents want is their children’s education dragged into partisan politics. But that seems to be where we’re headed if the State Board of Education’s far-right faction gets its way.
No one should be surprised that right-wingers are pressuring writing teams to craft new Texas public school social studies curriculum standards that are slanted to the political right. We reported in June that State Board of Education members had seeded the writing teams with far-right extremists who rail against immigration and think new President Obama is a racist who has “hatred and contempt for white people, traditional families, small business owners, evangelical Christians, conservatives, and everyone else that liberals call the ‘racist, heterosexist, nativist, Christianist, capitalist, homophobic power structure’ in America.”
So don’t be surprised if the rhetoric gets even more extreme. Take, for example, a recent e-newsletter from the author of the above quote accusing President Obama of racism. In the newsletter, the Peter Morrison Report, Mr. Morrison suggests darkly that health insurance reform will lead to euthanasia for the elderly:
In 1973 there was a Charlton Heston movie called Soylent Green, which depicted a nightmarish future for Americans, especially the elderly. In the film, America is massively overpopulated and resources are scarce. Food riots are common, and old people are seen as nothing but useless eaters, a burden on society which must be removed. In response, the government opens up euthanasia clinics to solve the problem. Such a bleak future is hard to envision, but some of the rhetoric we’re hearing with regard to Obamacare protesters is truly frightening.
Mr. Morrison also returns to his theme about the president’s alleged racism:
Texas Eagle Forum, a chapter of the national far-right organization founded by Phyllis Schlafly, has released its “Legislative Scorecards” for the recent legislative session in Austin. TEF’s scorecards rate the conservativism of state lawmakers based on their votes on selected issues. Most of the issue areas are standard right-wing stuff, such as allowing concealed handguns on college campuses (failed), requiring a woman to submit to an ultrasound before obtaining an abortion (failed), enacting restrictive voter ID requirements (failed), and opposing the expansion of the Children’s Health Insurance Program (succeeded).
The results, he writes, were mixed. We think this paragraph, in particular, hits the nail on the head:
The problem was this: The eight pro-science members (of the Texas State Board of Education), five Democrats and three Republicans, did not vote as a pro-science bloc, while the seven anti-science Biblical Literalist Republicans always voted as an anti-science bloc. Since they did this, all they needed was one additional vote to achieve their aims. Most of the pro-science Board members are friendly, moderate to conservative individuals who believe in collegiality, cooperation, and compromise, so most were willing to accept the weaker but still flawed substitute amendments that the religious right members proposed if their original blatantly anti-science amendment failed on an 8-7 vote, which usually happened. I could detect the emotional compulsion of some Board members to vote with a colleague for a less egregious amendment and to find some compromise on controversial issues. The Religious Right members exploited this characteristic again and again.
It’s bad enough that the State Board of Education claims David Barton is an “expert” who is qualified to help guide the revision of social studies curriculum standards for Texas public schools. But now we’re told Barton is a “constitutional expert,” too. Wow. Not bad considering that he earned only a bachelor’s degree in religious education, right?
It has been increasingly difficult to ignore the racially charged statements that keep coming from far-right members of the State Board of Education and their appointees to panels helping revise social studies curriculum standards for Texas public schools. In fact, their statements are becoming increasingly incendiary, as if they are hoping to provoke a bitter and divisive backlash.
Taken on their own, these arguments are alarming enough. But one of the people calling for the removal of Chavez and for de-emphasizing the contributions of minorities in American history, David Barton, gave speeches before white supremacist groups in the early 1990s. Barton later claimed that he didn’t know the groups were “part of a Nazi movement.” Well, maybe once. But twice? Really? In any case, does he not realize how that history — innocent or not — colors his arguments now? How his remarks are likely to inflame passions?
The latest troubling example of dragging race into the debate over the curriculum standards comes in an e-mail newsletter last week from one of the curriculum writing team members, Peter Morrison.
We noted in April that Texas Gov. Rick Perry was “proud” to be a guest on Glenn Beck’s FOX News show. Beck, as we noted then, believes liberals are trying “to remove God from America,” is an admirer of Focus on the Family’s James Dobson, and seems to buy into the “End Times” theology of the fringes of the fundamentalist right.
Beck is also a world-class conspiracy freak — and in serious need of a spell checker before he launches into one of his unhinged rants.
One of the religious right’s most effective strategies in winning political power has been running “stealth” candidates for office. A Texas Freedom Network Education Fund report in 2006 explored this tactic, quoting a 1986 memo from religious-right leader Pat Robertson to supporters seeking control of the Republican Party in Iowa:
“Give the impression you are there to work for the party, not to push for an ideology; hide your strength; don’t flaunt your Christianity.”
“Stealth” candidates are not a thing of the past for the religious right, especially now that more voters are aware of the political extremism they represent. Look, for example, at the current race for governor of Virginia.
In the late 1980s, Robert F. McDonnell submitted a master’s thesis to the evangelical school he was attending — Pat Robertson’s Regent University — in which he described working women and feminists as “detrimental” to the family. McDonnell also attacked “cohabitators,” “homosexuals” and “fornicators.” He even argued for allowing government to make the use of contraception by unmarried couples illegal.
Now as the Republican nominee for Virginia governor, McDonnell, 55, downplays his conservative beliefs. He says those views “have changed as I have gotten older.” His legislative record, however, doesn’t back up that claim.
For years Texas has had one of the highest rates of teen births in the country — and that rate is rising. At the same time, the state’s education officials have bowed to the demands of the religious right, with more than nine out of 10 school districts teaching abstinence-only-until-marriage instead of medically accurate sex education. In fact, a report released in February of this year by the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund revealed that just 2 percent of the state’s school districts teach comprehensive sex education that includes medically accurate information about contraception and preventing sexually transmitted diseases.
“If mom had a baby at age 15, are her morals going to be setting different standards than someone who has grown up in the American culture where that is not typical? As a matter of fact, we would look at someone impregnating a 15-year-old as child abuse.”
Rather than acknowledge the failure of abstinence-only programs that have a lock on the vast majority of Texas high school classrooms (and that waste millions of taxpayer dollars), Adams doubles down: teach the abstinence-only message in a variety of languages, she insists.
According to the group Child Trends, it’s true that the rate of teen births is higher for Hispanics than for non-Hispanic blacks and non-Hispanic whites nationally. But between 2006 and 2007, that rate declined for Hispanics while rising for the other two groups. Moreover, the state with the highest rate of teen births is Mississippi. The 2000 Census showed that just 1.4 percent of that state’s population was Hispanic or Latino.
Rather than criticizing the morals of immigrants, Adams would do well to address a primary cause for high rates of teen pregnancy: ignorance. Adams and others on the religious right think the solution to those high rates is to withhold critical information from teens. But that’s loco. Ignorance protects no one, especially not our young people. The statistics in Texas — the nation’s biggest abstinence-only experiment — seem to show that pretty clearly.
“I think it’s inappropriate because it smacks of political indoctrination of the worst kind. It’s not just a speech. It’s a specific curriculum to go along with the speech directly from the president of the United States without review.”
The truth is that our work wouldn’t be possible without the generous support of countless donors from across the state. Please consider joining our efforts for a better Texas. Click here to donate to TFN today. Together we are making a difference.
Far-right members of the Texas State Board of Educationcritical of President Obama’s planned speech to students next week apparently have selective memories. While they’re concerned that the president will politicize classrooms and try to “indoctrinate” students with a political agenda they oppose (even though the speech is simply about the importance of staying in school and getting a good education), they’re ignoring an earlier president who actually did drag politics into the classroom: Ronald Reagan.
As Media Matters reports, on Nov. 14, 1988, President Reagan addressed and took questions from students from four middle schools. The event was broadcast by C-Span and fed to schools across the country. During the event, President Reagan launched into a defense of tax cuts even in the face of growing budget deficits. He pressed the case that lowering taxes actually increases government revenue, an argument that Media Matters notes is sharply disputed by economists.
So we wonder whether far-right members of the State Board of Education will now denounce President Reagan for trying to indoctrinate students with his political agenda. But we won’t be holding our breath.
A prominent religious leader is now attacking the study of social sciences, saying it “promotes doubts and uncertainty” and “secularism.”
A new development in the growing debate over social studies curriculum standards in Texas public schools? Well, not exactly. The religious leader noted above is Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the “supreme leader” of Iran’s theocratic government. According to a story in the New York Times, Khamenei and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are suggesting “that the study of secular topics and ideas has made universities incubators for the political unrest unleashed after the disputed presidential election in June.”
“Many of the humanities and liberal arts are based on philosophies whose foundations are materialism and disbelief in godly and Islamic teachings,” Ayatollah Khamenei said at a gathering of university students and professors on Sunday, according to IRNA, the state news agency. Teaching those “sciences leads to the loss of belief in godly and Islamic knowledge.”
All of this comes as far-right ideologues helping guide the revision of social studies curriculum standards for Texas public schools are insisting that students learn the United States is a Christian nation and that the Founders intended our society and laws to be based on the Bible.
“His Address is undeniably unprecedented and arguably goes well beyond the scope of federal jurisdiction. It conceivably can be disconcerting for a member of the Federal Government to request the use of classroom time to make a connection with students on a national basis.
Understandable concerns may arise that such an address has the potential to open the door to students accepting an unconstitutional level of direct accountability to National Governing Authorities. The fact this presentation is being made at a time when the parents of these students will not be present to monitor the interaction makes it even more problematic.
Due to all the foregoing, the utilization of classroom instructional time for, what could potentially be, political posturing and influencing our children can be both controversial and arguably inappropriate.
Consequently, I encourage school districts to feel the liberty to refrain from participating in this national address during class time.”
One more time: this isn’t unprecedented, despite Ms. Dunbar’s claim. President Reagan and the first President Bush gave national addresses to schoolchildren in their classrooms. And the second President Bush was reading to schoolchildren when the 9/11 attacks occurred. The act of a president addressing fellow citizens, including students, is a valuable civic exercise in a democratic nation. And it should be particularly welcome when the president is talking about something that unites all parents — a desire that their children work hard, stay in school and get the education they need to succeed in life.
And what is Ms. Dunbar’s nonsense about opening “the door to students accepting an unconstitutional level of direct accountability to National Governing Authorities”? That’s just wacky. Does she really think President Obama is some sort of authoritarian dictator? We wonder if Ms. Dunbar’s personal journal is filled with references to “Amerika” and black helicopters, too.
Ms. Dunbar is fostering distrust in and hostility toward the current duly elected president of the United States simply because she doesn’t like his politics. She certainly has the right to do so — it’s a free country, after all. But shouldn’t we expect members of our State Board of Education to be a bit more responsible than that?
Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum is offering such a deal. In an e-mail today, the far-right group is pitching the “How to Take Back America Conference” in St. Louis later this month. “Space is extremely limited” at the conference’s hotel, we’re told. But despite the apparent high interest, Eagle Forum is keeping the “early bird conference rate” for registration. That’s right! Register now and save $20 off the regular registration! Well, where’s that check book???
The conference will feature a variety of entertaining far-right fanatics, including Rick Scarborough of Texas-based Vision America and Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., who can’t seem to let a day go by without saying something absurdly creepy.
But the conference will also offer “more than 20 exciting workshops” for activists angry about the Marxists SocialistsFascistsNazis really, really bad people who won the November elections, including:
“How to defend America vs. missile attack” (Will this be a hands-on workshop? Should activists bring their own personal Patriot anti-missile batteries?)
“How to recognize living under Nazis and communists” (Hint: It’s when anyone who disagrees with you gets elected.)
“How to deal with supremacist judges”
“How to stop socialism in health care”
“How to activate your church” (Are you really surprised there would be a workshop on how to drag churches into partisan politics?)
“How to counter the homosexual movement”
“How to understand Islam” (Oh, this should be really interesting.)
“How to deal with vote fraud, the Census, and ACORN”
“Hot to stop the killings: pro-life solutions” (Will this include how to stop the killing of doctors? We ask, you decide.)
Texas Eagle Forum’s Cathie Adams shows once again how extreme and unhinged the far right has become. In an e-mail to far-right activists sent out late Saturday night, Ms. Adams — who is also a Republican National Committeewoman and has endorsed Gov. Rick Perry for re-election next year — compares President Obama to Adolf Hitler and twists the purpose of his planned speech to students about the importance of staying in school and getting a good education:
“(The president) has NO AUTHORITY to intrude into our children’s classrooms and simultaneously address every child in every state.
If parents want their children to view the president, then they have ample opportunities at home without taking time away from their studies. This is eerily like Hitler’s youth movement. . . .
IF your child’s school is allowing this intrusion, then you can either ask that your child be sent to study hall during the showing AND that NO study guide be used to ask your child to “serve the president.” Or you can ask that your child be granted an excused absence from school. . . . “
That’s just shameful. One need not be a supporter of President Obama to agree that comparing our country’s duly elected leader to one of history’s most evil men — someone who ruthlessly presided over the murder of millions of people — is vile. Moreover, no suggested study guide asks students to “serve the president.” Ms. Adams’ claim is simply untrue. And the president has not asserted that he has the authority to demand that school officials have students listen to his speech. The administration has simply invited students and educators to do so. Ms. Adams is dishonestly and cynically trying to stir up anger and hostility toward a president who won an election despite her militant opposition.
Having students listen to a president speak about an important civic issue shouldn’t be so venomously controversial. In fact, both President Reagan and the first President Bush directly addressed students across the country. But extremists like Ms. Adams seem determined to politicize and poison nearly every aspect of our nation’s civic life.
Promoting the importance of education for our children isn’t just a Democratic or Republican value. It’s a mainstream value shared by all families, regardless of their politics. And claiming that a president promoting that value is acting like Adolf Hitler should disgust all citizens, regardless of their political party. Shame on Cathie Adams.
You can send an e-mail to Ms. Adams at torch@texaseagle.org and ask her to treat the president with the respect that his office deserves and that most Americans expect. (But if you do, please show the civility and restraint that Ms. Adams has not.)
From a message being circulated to a far-right e-mail list in Texas today:
“(T)he teen pregnancy rate is certainly not the fault of abstinence-only sex education programs but is instead the outgrowth of prolific contraceptive sex education programs.”
Texas has one of the highest teen birth rates in the country (and that rate is rising) and ranks first in multiple births to teens.
More than 9 in 10 Texas school districts teach abstinence-only when it comes to sex education. Just 2 percent teach medically accurate information about responsible pregnancy and disease prevention.
Texas has received more abstinence-only federal funding than any other state.
The same e-mail says the Obama administration and members of Congress “are trying to kill your children” because they support teaching not just the importance of abstinence, but also medically accurate information teens need to make important life decisions and protect themselves from pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.
Don’t buy the lie. Ignorance won’t protect our kids.
When we read Cathie Adams’ e-mail comparing President Obama to Adolf Hitler for addressing students across the country in a speech yesterday, we recalled that Adams has endorsed Texas Gov. Rick Perry for re-election. Gov. Perry’s campaign issued a press release on Aug. 21 announcing the endorsement from Adams, who heads the far-right Texas Eagle Forum:
“I am deeply honored to receive Cathie’s endorsement. Her efforts to defend life and family in Texas surpass all and I look forward to working with her on these important issues so we can continue to ensure Texas’ strength well into the future.”
In her e-mail late Saturday, Adams said the speech from our nation’s president about students working hard and staying in school was “eerily like Hilter’s youth movement.” Most conservatives are now pulling back from their absurd criticism of the speech, but Adams isn’t. Today she forwarded to her list an e-mail in which Phyllis Schlafly, the national head of Eagle Forum, accuses the Obama administration of trying to “brainwash” America’s children and turn them into “Obama’s servants.”
Still “deeply honored” by an extremist’s endorsement, Gov. Perry?
The flap over President Obama’s speech to students on Tuesday has exposed quite a bit of hypocrisy from the far right. Media Matters notes one big batch of hypocrisy from Texas State Board of Education member Barbara Cargill, R-The Woodlands.
“On NPR’s All Things Considered, host Noah Adams, introducing a report on President Obama’s September 8 speech to schoolchildren, stated that ’some parents and conservatives … called it a political intrusion into the school day.’ But NPR did not note that one of the conservatives quoted in the report, Texas State Board of Education member Barbara Cargill, has repeatedly engaged in political intrusions into the Texas school system, seeking — sometimes successfully — to change Texas schools’ curriculum to fit her conservative ideology.”
Cargill protested to NPR that the Obama administation had bypassed state and local school boards by sending notices of the speech directly to schools. She said that put schools in a difficult position, forcing them to anger some parents if they let students hear the speech and others if they didn’t. She also worried about students:
“If they (parents) opt their children out, they’re going to feel ostracized. They’re going to have to leave the comfort of their classroom to be dismissed to a gym.”
Please. That’s really weak sauce. Has anyone ever known students who were upset because they had to leave “the comfort of their classrom” to go to the gym or pretty much anywhere else? Is that the best reason Cargill has?
In any case, Cargill and other right-wingers complained that President Obama would “politicize” our children’s classrooms (which, of course, didn’t happen). But Media Matters points out the many ways that Cargill has done just that in her position as a State Board of Education member, especially during the process of revising science curriculum standards for Texas public schools.
Remember when some folks thought Cargill would be a more moderate replacement for Don McLeroy as state board chair last spring? Hardly.
Among the things we have already noticed in the review from Peter Marshall, a right-wing evangelical minister from Massachusetts, are a variety of absurd suggestions and glaring historical inaccuracies:
As you will recall, Marshall and David Barton have argued that the current social studies standards include too many minorities that, they say, really didn’t accomplish much. For example, they said Cesar Chavez was a poor role model for students who wasn’t historically significant. Marshall has now backed off his opposition to including Chavez. But who else does he suggest students should learn about? Pedro Flores, considered by many to be the first yo-yo maker in the United States. (Marshall inaccurately describes Flores as the “inventor of the yo-yo.”)
Marshall sees no problem with requiring students to learn about “conservative organizations and individuals like Newt Gingrich, Phyllis Schlafly and the Moral Majority. In fact, he suggests adding James Dobson (of Focus on the Family), Rush Limbaugh and the National Rifle Association. Marshall also suggests “liberals organizations” like MoveOn.org, the Sierra Club and Planned Parenthood — “provided,” he writes, “the students are made aware of Planned Parenthood’s funding of abortion clinics.”
Marshall keeps up his efforts to blacklist Anne Hutchison, calling her “a favorite of modern feminists” but “not sufficiently ’significant.’” In fact, Hutchison was exiled from the Massachusetts Bay Colony because she believed women deserved more rights and that individuals had the right to interpret the Bible as they saw fit (something Puritan clergy didn’t like).
He continues to insist that students learn religion was a leading influence in colonization and the desire for independence from Britain. We suppose that whole “taxation without representation” thing was just a passing fad, right?
Marshall says U.S. conquests and annexations of large swaths of Mexico and Hawaii and our control over the Philippines, Puerto Rico and other territories represented “expansion,” not “imperialism.” “Imperialism,” he writes, is a “pejorative” term that better described what the Europeans did.
He says the United States returned to Mexico “more than half” of the terrirory taken during the Mexican-American War, “drawing the border only where we had claimed it to be before the war — the Rio Grande River.” Actually, no. The United States annexed a huge swath of Mexican terrority from the Rio Grande to the Pacific Ocean. That area includes the entire southwestern United States today.
We should note, by the way, that the issue here isn’t whether American expansion was right or wrong. The issue is why someone who is wrong on basic historical facts is sitting on a panel of so-called “experts.”
We will post more about the other reviews as we work through them. But please post what you find as you read the reviews as well.
A Texas-based group affiliated with James Dobson’s far-right Focus on the Family is charging that an alleged “war on Christmas” has now moved to the debate over public school social studies curriculum standards in Texas. But the “evidence” the group provides is so absurd that they must think Texans are just plain stupid and gullible.
In an e-mail to activists, the group cynically charges that the first draft of the proposed new curriculum standards removes Christmas from a list of holidays students might learn about and replaces it with Diwali, a major festival in Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism:
“At stake is how Texas children are taught about the religious heritage of our country, the basic principles of civics, and the entire study of important and worthy individuals who have contributed in different ways to American society. For instance, the new proposed version removes Christmas from the current curriculum and replaces it with Diwali, in a section on ‘religious holidays and observances to be studied by students.’”
A spokesperson for the group shrieks in a blog post:
“It’s outrageous that the war on Christmas continues in our state and in our nation. This effort to mislead students about current society is shameful and must be stopped.”
Shame on them.
We know the “war on Christmas” lie has been a fund-raising bonanza for the religious right. But is it too much to ask that folks who claim to be so pious actually obey God’s commandment not to bear false witness? Some facts:
The course that includes this standard isn’t about American culture, civics and society. It’s a world geography and cultures class for Grade 6.
The standard focuses on “the significance of religious holidays and observances” around the world, not just in the United States. The original standard suggested two Christian holidays as well as Jewish and Islamic religious observances. The new standard keeps Easter as one Christian holiday but replaces Christmas with Diwali because the writing team wanted one example from each of the world’s major religions.
It’s cynical and insulting to suggest that the writing teams removed Christmas from the standards because of any bias against Christianity or to be somehow “politically correct.” (In fact, it’s likely that the vast majority of writing team members — if not all of them — are Christians.) The course is about world geography and cultures, and the team was making the standard stronger and more representative of world cultures.
But don’t bother talking sense to far-right groups trying to raise money by whipping their activists into a steaming froth. They’re too busy promoting a phony “war on Christmas.” The real war, however, is the one the religious right has launched on common sense in our children’s classrooms.
We told you at the beginning of the month how racially charged rhetoric is becoming more common in the debate over new social studies curriculum standards for Texas public schools. On Friday we saw another example of race-baiting rhetoric.
Peter Morrison, appointed by State Board of Education member David Bradley, R-BeaumontBuna, to a panel helping revise the social studies standards, appears to be especially obsessed with race. On Friday in a new issue of his e-newsletter, The Peter Morrison Report, he attacked President Obama’s speech to students earlier in the week as an attempt to “indoctrinate” them and “capture the hearts and minds of our kids.” And then he turns to his obsession:
“Obama’s speech contained plenty of propaganda, in both what was said and what was omitted. He told kids that they may face road blocks, such as discrimination. Really? It makes me wonder which kids he’s speaking to, because I’m not sure of where in America minorities are facing discrimination in employment or education. What company won’t hire non-whites? What schools won’t accept minorities? What banks makes loan decisions on skin color?”
“Obama didn’t mention the fact that he’s in favor of racial discrimination against the white students listening. He has already appointed a Supreme Court justice who is a big fan of racial preferences for non-whites and will no doubt make the problem even worse from the high court. Obama has made it clear he intends to do much, much more to expand affirmative action, racial quotas, and other anti-white discrimination.”
We have already heard far-right critics argue that the social studies standards have an “overrepresentation of minorities.” And Morrison makes it clear that we haven’t heard the last word on this.
That seems a reasonable conclusion after reading David Barton’s review of the first draft of new social studies curriculum standards for Texas public schools. He clearly hopes that Texans are gullible enough to buy the “war on Christmas” nonsense he and other far-right fanatics have been screaming about the last few years.
“To mention five religions and then mention five holidays ignores the Free-Market nature of America, even among religions. American is not evenly divided among these five religions. . . . The culture of America is not accurately reflected by pretending that all five religions have equal adherents.”
Barton assumes anyone who reads his criticism won’t know that he’s talking about curriculum standards for a course on world geography and cultures, not the United States. The list of religions and holidays isn’t supposed to “accurately reflect” American culture. It’s supposed to reflect the variety of cultures from around the world. He also hopes they won’t learn that the curriculum writers included Easter as the Christian holiday or that teachers are free to include any other holidays as they discuss the world’s major religions.
Barton is determined to stir people up with some notion that they and their faith are somehow under attack. But under attack by whom? The Christians who make up the curriculum writing teams? He thinks most people are too stupid or lazy to ask that question. He’s hoping they will simply gather their torches and pitchforks and march on the Texas Education Agency. Well, that and send him and the advocacy group he leads a generous donation for “protecting” Christianity.
All of which brings us again to this question: why in the world is Barton, a professional political activist who has no real academic qualifications in the social sciences, playing such a leading role in revising our state’s public school curriculum?
The debate over new social studies curriculum standards will shift into higher gear when the Texas State Board of Education meets this week. TFN Insider will provide updates about the action here.
On Thursday the board will hear from so-called “experts” it has appointed to a special panel helping guide the revision of the social studies standards. Representatives of curriculum writing teams will also speak to the board about their work and their first drafts of the standards, which they completed at the end of July.
The board is likely to hear from at least four of its so-called “experts”: David Barton, former vice chair of the Texas Republican Party and head of the Christian-right organization WallBuilders; Peter Marshal, a far-right evangelical minister from Massachusetts; Prof. Jesus Francisco de la Teja from Texas State University; and Prof. Jim Kracht from Texas A&M. You can learn more about these panelists here.
The contrast in their presentations should be interesting.
Although both are absurdly unqualified to serve as social studies “experts,” Barton and Marshall have been clear about the political agenda they are pushing in the debate over the new standards. Both oppose separation of church and state and want students to learn that the Founders intended to create an explicitly Christian nation based on conservative Christian biblical principles. Both have also criticized “multiculturalism” in the standards, and they have suggested the removal from the standards of important labor and civil rights leaders like Cesar Chavez and Thurgood Marshall.
De la Teja and Kracht, on the other hand, are respected, mainstream academics from two of the state’s largest public universities. Their reviews of the current and the proposed new standards have focused largely on academic issues and their areas of expertise.
Curriculum writing teams will use feedback from this week’s meeting to revise their first drafts of the proposed new standards. The board will discuss those revisions in November and is set to hold its first full public hearing on the proposed standards in January. A final vote on the standards is expected in March. Publishers will then use those standards to write new textbooks for Texas classrooms.
Now WorldNetDaily — the fringe Web site that promotes one far-right conspiracy theory after another — is peddling the bogus “war on Christmas” story in Texas. But that’s not the only thing WND is peddling. Read on to find out how the Web site does a pretty good job of demeaning Christmas all on its own.
Dave Welch, head of the U.S. Pastor Council and Houston Area Pastor Council, leads the charge in an essay on WND. Welch criticizes social studies curriculum writers in Texas for proposing to drop Christmas and add the Hindu and Buddhist festival of Diwali in a requirement that students learn about significant religious holidays and observances from the world’s major religions. Welch charges that the proposed changes are an attack on Christmas, Christianity and America’s heritage:
“Secular, anti-Christian revisionists want our children to think that all religions are equal, that there are many paths to God, god-consciousness, Mother Earth, etc., and that all religions and cultures produce equal fruits. It is beyond disturbing that many if not most educational experts in charge of the majority of our nation’s children believe this to be true.”
Never mind that the requirement appears in a course about world cultures, not the United States. Never mind that Christianity isn’t univerally practiced around the world. And never mind that curriculum writers wanted to offer one example for each of the world’s major religions, including Easter for Christianity. Why let facts get in the way of manufactured outrage?
Welch goes on to describe the significance of Christmas:
“It’s about the name of Jesus, stupid. At the end of the day, it is always about the name and the divinity of Jesus Christ.”
But not for WorldNetDaily, apparently. In the middle of Welch’s essay we find an advertising link taking readers to the “WND Superstore”:
That’s right. For just $3.99 you can advertise the real “Reason for the Season” with a tacky auto magnet. (Hurry while supplies last!) According to the “WND Superstore”:
“Here’s another way to express yourself this Christmas season — and the next and the next! This durable ‘Reason for the Season Auto Magnet’ is a 7-inch Christmas tree image with a Nativity scene within–the perfect reminder that Jesus is the true reason we celebrate Christmas.”
So the religious right — always looking for a reason to be outraged — has no problem with commercializing the birth of Jesus to earn a few bucks. If Welch is looking for a real “war on Christmas,” he doesn’t need to look much further than the Web site that published his hypocritical essay. But he finds it easier to attack hard-working teachers helping write a curriculum that gives Texas students a well-rounded education.
David Barton is complaining about a bogus “war on Christmas” in proposed new social studies curriculum standards, but what about his “war on grammar”? And Barton has also complained that too many “insignificant” historial figures have been included in the standards, crowding out people he thinks are more important. So why is he proposing that students be required to study John Wayne, Cecil B. DeMille and Jimmy Stewart?
“Unlike science, where most of the debate was over evolution, the list of items to be discussed for social studies is long, ranging from which historical figures should be covered in class to what role Christianity and the Bible played in the founding of the nation. And with an elected board that reflects political tension over social issues, the process is sure to play out as yet another front in the nation’s culture war.”
UPDATE: The Houston Chronicle and Austin American-Statesman also have good previews of today’s meeting. We particularly liked the following quote in the Statesman from John Fea, a history professor at Messiah College, a Christian school in Pennsylvania. Fea spoke about ideologues who are trying to revise the standards in a way that supports their arguments that the Founders intended to create a distinctly Christian nation based on conservative Christian biblical principles:
“Students are not learning history. They are learning the facts about the past that suit some larger agenda, a cultural and political agenda. My best advice would be to respect the historians, respect the voice of historians and try to keep politics out of the teaching of history.”
9:45 – The State Board of Education has begun today’s hearing proposed new social studies curriculum standards for Texas public schools. State Rep. Eddie Rodriguez, D-Austin, is objecting to efforts to downplay the significance of Cesar Chavez and Thurgood Marshall in the new standards.
9:53 – Latino members of the State Board of Education are also speaking out on the importance of including the contributions of Latinos in our state and national history.
10:02 – TFN President Kathy Miller is now speaking before the board.
10:03 – Kathy is expressing her concerns about the process the state board has taken to this point in the standards revision. “It really looks like (the state board is) putting politics ahead of sound scholarship and quality education in our classrooms.”
10:04 – “Even the writing teams are feeling the heightened politicization of the process.”
10:05 – Kathy: This politicization is eroding the faith that parents might have that the process will result in standards that give their kids a sound education.
10:08 – Yannis Banks of the Texas NAACP expresses his dismay at suggestions that Thurgood Marshall isn’t a significant enough historical figure to be included in the standards, calling that contention “insulting.”
10:15 – Fidel Acevedo of Texas LULAC also argues for including important Latinos like Cesar Chavez in the standards.
10:16- It’s important to note that some board members are blaming curriculum writers for suggesting that Marshall and Chavez be dropped from the standards. But that’s not true. Calls to drop them from the standards came from David Barton and Peter Marshall, two unqualified right-wing political activists placed by the state board on a panel of so-called “experts” helping guide the curriculum revision process. Board members should stop trying to blame the teachers and academics on the writing teams. The responsibility is on the shoulders of the board members who put Barton and Marshall on the “expert” panel.
10:28 – The far right has its own activists here. One wants students to understand that Christianity, Judaism and Islam worship one God, unlike Hinduish. “This is a religion that pushes many, many gods — almost one for every day of the week.” OK. Got it.
10:29 – “There are forces in our federal government trying to completely rewrite our Constitution of the United States.” Okay… (eye roll)
10:30 – Steven Schafersman of Texas Citizens for Science is speaking now, criticizing efforts to use the social studies standards to promote religion and undermine separation of church and state.
10:33 – Public testimony is done. The board will now hear from the so-called “experts” and curriculum writers.
10:49 – Prof. Frank de la Teja from Texas State, one of the board’s social studies experts and chairman of the Texas State history department, speaks first. One of the themes in his statement is the importance of recognizing America’s diverse history and peoples and their contributions.
10:51 – Evolving democratic institutions in the United States, de la Teja explains, expanded voting and other rights and participation of minorities in American government and society. “The republic has been moving in the direction of a more perfect union since its founding. That journey is not over.”
10:57 – De la Teja is making clear that we do a disservice to our children by presenting a view of American history that is too narrow and limited just to traditional historical figures and events.
11:11 – Peter Marshall of Peter Marshall Ministries is up. He goes right to the Declaration of Independence, proclaiming that the United States was “founded on a creed, a statement of faith.”
11:13 – Rev. Marshall moves into sermon mode, arguing about the importance of belief in God to the nation’s founding and the rights and equality of people. He also argues that a study of the Great Awakening is critical to understanding the nation’s founding.
11:20 – Marshall: Students should learn that “America is a Godly experiment that has no equal in human history.”
11:25 – Marshall: “I’m concerned that the modern trend of just identifying people as groups … I don’t want to see that get out of hand.”
11:25 – SBOE member Mary Helen Berlanga isn’t buying it, reminding Marshall that Hispanics have often been treated as a group — discriminated against because of who they are.
11:27 – SBOE member Mavis Knight wants to know why Marshall wanted Thurgood Marshall dropped from the standards. Peter Marshall goes into a strange discussion about the importance of teaching character to children. What does that have to do with the question?
11:32 – Peter Marshall: He argues that the Founders meant all people when the Declaration of Independence stated that “all men are created equal.” That would be disputed by a number of historians, of course — especially those who correctly note the many Africans who had been enslaved in this country and that women had no right to vote at the time.
11:38 – SBOE member Rick Agosto of San Antonio wants to know why Rev. Marshall wants to include Pedro Flores as “inventor of the yo-yo” in the standards. Marshall replies that he just wanted to be careful about throwing people in the standards. Yeah, we’re confused, too.
11:39 – Prof. Lybeth Hodges of Texas Women’s University is speaking now. Prof. Hodges is focusing partly on issues in coordinating the curriculum standards and standards-based testing. She also expresses the importance of including coverage of minorities and their contributions in the standards.
11:49 – Another gem from Rev. Marshall’s testimony earlier:
“All men are created equal… this has been the basis of every great social crisis through American history. It was the basis for the American Revolution, the abolition of slavery, the women’s movement, the civil right movement, and is the basis for the modern-day pro-life movement.”
“At some point in life’s journey, both boys and girls must break free from the mother/woman as the source of vitality and power, and yield to Jesus as the source of power and life. Many women have found themselves crying out for someone to deliver them from the natural compulsion to control the lives of others, which is what years of being the life-giving source of vitality for children and husband can easily turn into. And boys cannot become men capable of exercising Godly power in the world as protectors and providers, men who have mastered themselves and thus can execute justice in society and right its wrongs, unless they have separated from their mothers and given themselves to One who is greater than their earthly fathers.”
11:56 – Prof. Jim Kracht of Texas A&M is speaking now. No surprise that the board will let David Barton speak last (among the so-called “experts”).
11:58 – Prof. Kracht suggests that the social studies curriculum standards currently used in Texas public schools don’t need a complete overhaul. Based on their comments about the standards thus far, Prof. Kracht’s suggestion would probably be disputed by David Barton and Peter Marshall.
12:01 – TalkingPointsMemo is following the today’s State Board of Education meeting and has some good insights. Check it out.
12:03 – Prof. Kracht warns about overloading the standards with too many people, dates and events. “Please keep in mind what is necessary.” He also argues, however, that the board should consider balance on various points of view: “It is not a place to put in A point of view, A frame of reference.”
12:07 – SBOE member Terri Leo, one of the board’s far-right members, latches on to Prof. Kracht’s warning about the importance of focusing on what is necessary in the standards. The problem will be her interpretation of what IS necessary and what’s not. Any guesses?
12:26 – Now David Barton is up. He has a slide show! PowerPoint, anyway.
12:28 – Barton has embarked on a long list of “American heroes” who were African-American, Hispanic and Jewish. All of have been left out of the standards, he notes, but students should know about them. It’s as if he is determined to distract critics who have noted his attacks on “multiculturalism” and including people in the standards because of their ethnicity instead of their contributions in American history.
12:37 – Now he goes through a long list of dates and events that should be included to help students understand the Constitution and its origins. But here’s a problem: amateur historians know a lot of dates and events, but they don’t have much expertise in interpreting those events and their significance. Instead of expertise, they substitute their own ideological biases.
12:41 – We’ve said it before: Barton can dazzle with a smooth speaking style and an ability to rattle off a series of facts that makes him appear to be an “expert.” The problem is his historical interpretations are so distorted by his ideological bias.
“(Chavez’s) open affiliation with Saul Alinsky’s movements certainly makes dubious that he is a praiseworthy to be heralded to students as someone ‘who modeled active participation in the democratic process.’”
1:01 – SBOE board member Terri Leo is asking Barton to explain his thoughts on the proper placement of people in the standards. But she’s ignoring Barton’s criticism of Chavez as having an “open affiliation with Saul Alinksy’s movements.” Barton will ignore it, too.
1:04 – Yeah, we were right. Barton is portraying his position on Chavez as simply an issue of where in the standards he should be.
1:05 – SBOE member Rick Agosto asks about Barton’s criticism of which holidays are being listed in the standards. Barton now says he thinks dropping from Christmas from a standard in the Grade 6 world cultures course wasn’t an attempt to undermine or hide the importance of Christmas in America. But in his review of the first draft of the standards, Barton suggested that the curriculum writers were deliberately undermining the significance of Christmas in the heritage of America:
“To mention five religions and then mention five holidays ignores the Free-Market nature of America, even among religions. America is not evenly divided among these five religions. . . . The culture of America is not accurately reflected by pretending that all five religions have equal adherents.”
2:25 – The board broke for lunch after David Barton’s comments. Next up will be comments from representatives of the social studies curriculum writing teams.
2:48 – The board is going through each grade level, listening to the curriculum writers. Nothing particularly controversial.
2:52 – Curriculum writers are using this opportunity to defend themselves against criticism that they had left out important Americans and events in their earlier work on the standards. Teachers are explaining the importance of keeping in mind when (at what grade level) and how various historical facts are introduced. We’ll probably have fewer posts here unless some controversy develops during this testimony.
2:59 – Well, this didn’t take long. SBOE board member Terri Leo notes that the Legislature requires students to learn about patriotism, and she objects to references to “global citizenship” in the standards. Such references, she says, don’t promote patriotism.
3:01 – Leo also objects to leaving a discussion of Nathan Hale out of the standards for first grade. But teachers are explaining that Hale’s execution is a difficult and perhaps disturbing concept for such young students. Further, they say, there are very few good, age-appropriate materials available for teaching students about Hale. But Leo and board member Cynthia Dunbar are insisting that Hale must be included. In the grand scheme of things this surely isn’t a big deal. But it’s another example of the board’s far-right members thinking that teachers don’t know what they’re talking about.
3:07 – Leo is back on her “global citizens” complaint. She thinks this is unpatriotic and doesn’t promote American “nationalism.” Board member Bob Craig speaks up to disagree. He’s too kind to say: Leo’s objection is wacked. Does she think first-graders are going to suddenly turn into anti-American zealots because their teacher talks about the concept that we’re all citizens of our world?
3:25 – The curriculum writer for second grade notes that her team never considered dropping Thurgood Marshall from the standards and were, in fact, proud to be able to teach about him. This helps correct the misconception promoted by some board members that objections to Thurgood Marshall came from the writing teams. In fact, those objections came from the so-called “experts” — David Barton and Peter Marshall — appointed by board members themselves.
3:55 – We’re still here. Most of the discussion is focused on specific examples of names and events in the standards. Nothing controversial.
4:45 – A curriculum writer for Grade 6 expresses her dismay over the bogus “war on Christmas” controversy. She explains there was never an intent to keep teachers from teaching about Christmas. It’s absurd that she has to explain something so basic — the writing team was offering one example of a significant holiday from each of the world’s major religions. They included Easter for Christianity instead of Christmas. There was no hidden effort to attack Christmas or Christianity.
5:16 – SBOE board member Don McLeroy asks why the U.S. 8th-grade history curriculum team ever considered removing a standard requiring students to “describe how religion contributed to the growth of representative government in the American colonies.” The curriculum writer notes that there was never majority support for removing it.
5:20 – McLeroy: “We were impressed with David Barton’s command of history.” Well, not all of us, Dr. McLeroy.
5:23 – McLeroy wants students to learn about what he believes are the biblical and Christian foundations of American government: “I’m convinced that’s a missing link, a missing story, about the foundations of our country.”
5:39 – In the government course, SBOE member Terri Leo says she wants the Bible and William Blackstone listed in a standard about “principles and ideas that underlie the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, and the U.S. Constitution.” Board member Bob Craig objects, noting that the standard is speaking about “principles and ideas.”
5:45 – Don McLeroy weighs in again on Christian foundations for America. “I agree, we are a secular state. We are not a Christian nation.” But then he goes on to insist that the nation was founded on biblical and Christian principles. “The atheist secularists today say there is no truth and we just evolved. And those are clearly not the principles enunciated in our nation’s founding documents.” McLeroy argues that “there are deeper principles than the Enlightenment principles,” meaning Christian biblical principles.
5:48 – The curriculum team member for the government course suggests that a separate standard on the Judeo-Christian foundations of American government might be better.
6:03 – SBOE Pat Hardy suggests changing the U.S. history standard about identifying “significant” conservative individuals and advocacy organizations to just “significant advocacy organizations” (not just conservative), along with the list of examples. Hardy suggests adding Moveon.org to the list. SBOE board member Mavis Knight suggests leaving out all examples of “advocacy organizations.”
6:07 – Don McLeroy wants discussion of civil rights laws to note Republicans who worked to pass them. All of the groups listed now, he says, are from the left. The political push, he argues, came from Republicans, and more Republicans voted for it than Democrats.
6:18 – McLeroy says he has a problem with the difficulties of choosing which organizations to include as examples of advocacy groups. Well, duh. That’s why the standards shouldn’t be listing groups based on whether they are conservative or liberal. They should be listed based on what they accomplished.
6:55 – SBOE member Barbara Cargill wants to add Puritan and colonial American Pilgrim influences and teachings to a standard that has students “trace the process by which democratic-republican government evolved from its beginnings in teh Hebrew legal tradition, classical Greece and Rome, through developments in England, and continuing with the Enlightenment.” This is only one of the places in the social studies curriculum in which Cargill wants students to learn that the Puritans/Pilgrims influenced the development of representative government.
6:59 – The board has concluded the hearing. Curriculum writing teams will now consider recommendations from board members and the so-called “experts” in revising their first drafts of the standards. Second drafts of the standards are due before the board’s next meeting in November.
Today’s State Board of Education hearing on proposed new social studies standards for Texas public schools was long and often exhausting. (Scroll down to find our blog posts from the hearing.) But we noted some important progress for ensuring that our schoolchildren get an honest and sound education.
In particular, David Barton and Peter Marshall were in full retreat from their calls over the summer to remove Cesar Chavez and Thurgood Marshall from the social studies standards. When questioned today by state board members, the two claimed they had never really wanted to blacklist the two famous civil rights leaders. Oh no, they simply thought that Chavez and Marshall had been misplaced in the standards. By suggesting that discussion of Chavez be moved elsewhere, for example, Barton even claimed he was trying to make room for more minorities. Marshall protested that he had only wanted to make sure that the two were discussed in their proper context.
All of that was misleading, of course. This is what Barton had said about Chavez last June:
“(Chavez’s) open affiliation with Saul Alinsky’s movements certainly makes dubious that he is a praiseworthy to be heralded to students as someone ‘who modeled active participation in the democratic process.’”
Peter Marshall had said much the same:
“Chavez is hardly the kind of role model that ought to be held up to our children as someone worthy of emulation.”
He had also argued in June that Thurgood Marshall wasn’t “a strong enough example” of an important historical figure to be included in the standards.
So what happened? After TFN exposed those absurd comments this summer, newspapers, elected officials, educators, civil rights groups and parents were vocal and loud in opposing efforts to censor instruction about Chavez and Marshall. Barton and Peter Marshall obviously felt the heat and backed down. In fact, Barton today ended up offering an extensive list of minorities he thought should be included in the standards (even though he has argued in the past that “multicultural” standards too often crowd out instruction on important American heroes and historical figures from the past).
But while we made some progress today on one front in the far-right’s curriculum “culture war,” the board’s far-right faction continued to pressure curriculum teams to rewrite the history of the relationship between religion and government in the United States. They insisted that the teams include standards suggesting that our nation and government were founded on conservative Christian biblical principles. Those efforts to distort history — and undermine important protections for religious freedom in our country — are likely to continue until the final vote on new curriculum standards in March.
Texas isn’t the only state that is constitutionally challenged. In fact, Mississippi is giving us a run for our money when it comes to (willful?) ignorance about what the First Amendment means.
In May, the state of Mississippi threw a state-funded abstinence-only rally for students where they were told the value of not having sex until marriage (including a chant that went “Stop! Don’t touch me there! This is my no-no square!”). That in itself is legal, but not when the rally itself is from start to finish a blatant attempt at proselytizing students in Christianity.
The ACLU just brought forth a lawsuit against the state of Mississippi last week for violating the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from promoting one religion over another.
(You can read about the rally — and watch video clips — here. Suffice it to say, this rally didn’t simply brush up against the church-state boundary. It trampled right over it.)
Now Mississippi Senior Pastor Lt. Governor Phil Bryant weighs in with local news reporter on the lawsuit, but apparently under the impression that he was really speaking to a Sunday school class at his church:
“I was so disappointed that the ACLU has decided that we don’t need to tell young women in the state of Mississippi about our faith; we don’t need to explain to them that abstinence, we believe, is related to our faithful Christianity beliefs.”
(Pause to let that sink in — or to weep quietly.) Let’s count the problems with this statement:
Government telling young people “about our faith” and “faithful Christianity beliefs” is a little something the Founders liked to call “establishment of religion.” And they weren’t too fond of the idea of government telling citizens what to believe.
Did you notice that the lieutenant governor believes it’s only the “young women in the state of Mississippi” who need to be educated? Sadly, this “boys will be boys” attitude is not uncommon in abstinence-only programs (as TFN revealed in our report earlier this year), and it has the effect of unfairly burdening young women with responsibility for controlling the behavior of males.
One more time for the record: the ACLU didn’t decide that government can’t establish a religion or coerce belief. The Constitution settles that issue!
Watch the video for yourself. And if you are so inclined, say a little prayer for the young people of Mississippi who live in the state with the highest teen birth rate in the nation (ever higher than in Texas!), but have leaders who think the best thing the government can do is preach to students.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry is speaking in the nation’s capital today at the “Values Voter Summit,” a confab put together by a constellation of religious-right groups like the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family and the American Family Association. What’s more likely to make news in coming weeks, however, are the governor’s comments this past Thursday questioning whether Texas has been affected by the national recession. “We’re in one?” the governor jokingly asked when speaking at a Houston Chamber of Commerce event.
The next day the Texas Workforce Commission announced that unemployment in Texas hit 8 percent, a 22-year high, in August. And, of course, earlier this year Gov. Perry infamously rejected federal stimulus money for the unemployed in our supposedly imaginary recession.
We wonder what the pious folks at the “Values Voter Summit” will think about the governor’s callous disregard of the problems facing working families right now. Is that one of the “values” they want their speakers promoting?
Check out Gov. Perry’s comments in this short video clip.
The religious right is still a powerful force in Texas, but is it finally on the decline in the rest of the country? That’s what E.J. Dionne, the award-winning columnist for The Washington Post, suggests in his best-selling book Souled Out: Reclaiming Faith and Politics after the Religious Right. You can still reserve a seat to hear Dionne talk about the religious right’s influence at a TFN Faith and Freedom Speaker Series event this Thursday (September 24) in Austin. The event begins at 6:30 p.m. at First Baptist Church, 901 Trinity St, in Austin.
Dionne is one of the nation’s most respected voices on faith and politics in America today. Dionne has reported for the New York Times and the Washington Post and began writing his column for the Post in 1993. He has also been a frequent commentator on public television’s NewsHour, NPR’s All Things Considered and major network news shows.
This is the fourth year of TFN’s Faith and Freedom Speaker Series, which brings to Texas leading voices and cutting edge thinkers from the busy intersection of culture, politics and religion in contemporary America.
Last week’s Texas State Board of Education meeting included an interesting discussion about who should be helping guide the revision of curriculum standards. The conversation was a perfect example of how politics and mediocrity have taken precedence over scholarship and expertise in deciding what students will learn in Texas public school classrooms.
If you’re involved in politics, you get a lot of mail. Some of it is very supportive and encouraging. Other mail, not so much. We thought we’d share with you some of the hate mail the Texas Freedom Network gets. Some messages – such as the rusty saw blade we received by postal a while back — aren’t reproducible here, of course. But usually the e-mail and letters we get offer plenty of quotable material. Enjoy.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s re-election campaign just sent out an e-mail touting his speech at the religious right’s “Values Voter Summit” in Washington, D.C., this past weekend. This speech excerpt noted in the e-mail caught our eye:
“It is well past time for us to halt the endless intrusions into our lives, put a stop to the out-of-control spending, and restore our commitment to a shared set of values… I’m talking about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness…”
“Halt the endless instrusions into our lives”? Does Gov. Perry mean halting government intrusions into the private lives of gay and lesbian families? Or government intrusions into the private decisions women make about their reproductive health in consultation with their doctors? Or government intrusions into matters of faith?
Somehow we don’t think that’s what the governor meant. It would be nice if he did. Then we would know he truly supports “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” for all Texans.
So the countless civil rights workers who put their lives on the line and women who marched and lobbied for voting and equal rights – all of those generations of Americans who demanded that our country live up to its promise of justice and equality for all — have ”the majority” to thank for finally granting them the rights they should have always had?
Look, Don McLeroy is a very nice man, and he is not a bigot. But he’s not a historian either. Yet he and too many of his equally clueless colleagues on the State Board of Education think they are. And they are putting their bizarre and politically distorted beliefs about history ahead of the expertise of true historians in deciding what millions of Texas children will learn in their public school classrooms.
This will get worse, unfortunately. It always does with this board.
Are evolution deniers in the “intelligent design”/creationism movement adopting the disruptive tactics of rowdy folks who besieged “town hall” meetings in August to protest health insurance reform? We hope not. But it’s a fair question considering an extra-credit assignment some students at a fundamentalist Christian seminary were offered last week.
A little background: Southern Methodist University in Dallas is hosting a series of events this year to mark the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s birth and the 150th anniversary of his seminal book, Origin of the Species. This week the university is hosting panel discussions and screening of a NOVA documentary about the war evolution deniers have waged on science education.
Now William Dembski, a mathematician and philosopher who teaches at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth and who has emerged in the last decade as one of the leading proponents of “intelligent design”/creationism, wants his students to attend the SMU events this week. From his Web site:
“I don’t want you going there merely as spectators but will indicate in class how you might actively participate and engage the Darwin-lovers you’ll find there.”
“Engage the Darwin-lovers”? Hmmm… This should be interesting.
The religious right is in full froth this week as some American Muslims prepare to gather in prayer in the nation’s capital on Friday. The stated objective of the “Our Time Has Come” gathering, according to organizers who hope 50,000 Muslims will take part, “is to invite the Muslim Communities and friends of Islam to express and illustrate the wonderful diversity of Islam.”
Two years ago, the state of Texas passed a law encouraging — but NOT mandating — elective Bible courses in public schools. (TFN and other religious and civil liberties groups worked very hard to make sure this new law included a few common-sense safeguards that would prevent teachers from turning such courses into Sunday school classes that favored one interpretation of the Bible over others. A 2006 TFN Education Fund report authored by Dr. Mark Chancey of SMU revealed that existing public school Bible courses were rife with such problems.)
Predictably, the pious lawmakers who were so anxious to introduce the Bible into the classroom quickly declared “mission accomplished” when the bill passed and left school districts and teachers with the difficult task of figuring out how to implement these courses. Worse, the Texas Legislature failed to appropriate any money for teacher training (though the law specifies that such training is a prerequisite to offering Bible courses), and the State Board of Education neglected to provide any curriculum guidelines for teachers who wish to construct an appropriate course (again, though the law specifies that such curriculum standards be adopted).
• The Act grants Texas public high schools the authority to offer an elective course in the history and literature of the Bible, but does
not require that they offer such a course.
• Public schools can teach about the Bible in an objective and academic manner, “as part of a secular program of education.” For
instance, classes may examine the Bible from a literary or historical perspective.
• Public schools cannot teach about the Bible when they lack a secular purpose for doing so, the primary effect of the class is to
advance religion, or the class fosters excessive entanglement between government and religion.
• Ask yourself, “Does the course teach the Bible or teach about the Bible?” Theological study of the Bible or other religious texts
violates the Establishment Clause, while objective study about such texts does not.
• Teachers cannot present religious doctrine to their students as a means of proselytizing or promoting a particular faith, or
promoting religion over non-religion.
TFN commends this excellent resource to any school district that is confused about the new law — and to any parents who want to be sure that the religious freedom of their children is respected at school (something ALL parents should be concerned about).
Kudos to our friends at the ACLU of Texas for picking up the ball our state policy-makers dropped. And isn’t it a sweet irony that the very group religious conservatives constantly criticize for suing school districts is doing more to keep schools out of court than the far-right demagogues who harass them?
The Texas Freedom Network was grateful for the strong efforts of Texas legislators who worked in Austin this year on critical issues such as responsible sex education, medical research and public education. We had some important victories and some disappointing setbacks. But along the way we worked with legislators who fearlessly championed mainstream values and fought back against the far right’s divisive agenda in Texas. We were very happy to honor three of those key lawmakers at our San Antonio reception for TFN supporters last Tuesday (Sept. 22):
When others were reluctant to step forward, these three lawmakers challenged their colleagues to address one of Texas’ most pressing public health issues: the appallingly high rates of teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Despite repeated attempts by opponents to stonewall their efforts, these San Antonio lawmakers were tireless in their advocacy for medically accurate, evidence-based sex education programs in our schools. Even though sex-ed legislation they championed did not ultimately win passage this year, TFN is optimistic about the possibilities for real change in coming years largely because these three leaders won’t take “no” for an answer.
In addition, Sen. Van de Putte led successful efforts to block Senate confirmation of Don McLeroy’s appointment to a second term as chair of the State Board of Education. During McLeroy’s first term, the state board had become increasingly bogged down in divisive, unnecessary “culture war” battles instead of focusing on making sure Texas students get a sound education fit for the 21st century.
Please join TFN in saying “thank you” to these amazing public servants. To make a contribution in honor of these 2009 Legislative Heroes, please click here.
(Pictured, left to right: Rep. Representative Joaquin Castro, Rep. Mike Villarreal, Sen. Leticia Van de Putte, TFN President Kathy Miller. Photo by Antonia Pedilla)
Think Texas lawmakers forgot about the State Board of Education after this year’s legislative session came to a close on June 1? Don’t bet on it. Republican legislative leaders might have stopped efforts to reform the state board during the session, but the state board has done plenty since then to remind lawmakers why those reform efforts are so important.
Now state Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso, has written the board’s new chair — Gail Lowe, R-Lampasas — to express his dismay that the board is still playing politics with the education of Texas schoolchildren. In a letter to Ms. Lowe dated Sept. 8, Sen. Shapleigh recounted the contuining political nonsense that is dominating the board’s work. He noted, for example, that far-right board members had appointed unqualified ideologues to a curriculum panel and that those ideologues opposed teaching social studies students about important civil rights figures like Cesar Chavez and Thurgood Marshall. He also criticized suggestions that students learn about people and groups like Newt Gingrich, Phyllis Schlafly and the Moral Majority simply because they are politically conservative.
Money quote:
“In as clear a signal as Texas can send, the Senate stripped Don McLeroy of his chairmanship [of the state board] for precisely the unproductive, partisan behavior that now warrants delivery of this letter. Given the Legislature’s concerns, it is both alarming and disappointing to see that the Board feels comfortable continuing down the same path of politicization and gridlock.
On one issue we all agree: Texas’ future depends on how well we educate our most valuable resource—our children. Teaching children about our rich American legacy, where people from all walks, all ethnicities, and all regions of our great nation succeed by virtue of courage, hard work, honesty, and education—that is the story we ought to share with our next generation. Our children need to compete with the world using a working knowledge of real American history, not the results of the last primary.”
Texas parents should thank Sen. Shapleigh for his strong leadership in trying to rein in a state board that continues to put political agendas ahead of the education of Texas schoolchildren.
Sen. Shapleigh’s full letter to Ms. Lowe follows after the jump.
On Sunday the Dallas Morning News and the Austin American-Statesman ran separate stories about ethics concerns surrounding the state board’s management of the PSF. The $20.5 billion fund is the second largest educational endowment in the country. That money funds the purchase of textbooks and other school supplies and guarantees bonds issued by local school districts.
There is more to the story than what was reported on Sunday by the Morning News and Statesman. But first, here’s a summary of what we saw as some key points in the two stories:
- The stories detail ethics concerns regarding recent board votes to hire a new general investment consultant, Massachusetts-based New England Pension Consultants (NEPC), to help board members manage the PSF.
- Some state board members say they were not told that several members of PSF’s executive staff expressed concerns about potential ethics violations by board members involved with the decision to hire NEPC.
- NEPC’s primary champion on the state board was Rick Agosto, D-San Antonio, who works as a marketer for institutional investment firms in his private business. According to the Morning News and the American-Statesman, Mr. Agosto had prior business contacts with NEPC and was seeking the firm’s help in getting investment business for one of his clients.
- NEPC won the PSF contract from the state board despite submitting the highest bid and receiving the lowest ranking from the PSF’s professional staff. The firm’s first bid, $1.045 million per year, was more than twice the bid of each of its competitors, $430,000 and $448,251. NEPC subsequently lowered its bid to $580,000 per year, but even that figure was still the high bid by a substantial margin.
- Mr. Agosto suggested to the American-Statesman that questions about his relationship with NEPC were politically motivated. Some board members, he alleged, “like to use things like this … and create controversy, and they even have certain staff members on their side.” From the American-Statesman story:
“There is total mistrust between the staff and the board,” Agosto said. He lamented that (Texas Education Commissioner Robert) Scott, not the board, has the authority to hire or fire the investment staff.
That could change.
At the most recent Permanent School Fund meeting, the committee asked that a management study be conducted to look at adopting a structure similar to that of the University of Texas Investment Management Co., a private nonprofit corporation that oversees several higher education funds.
Such a change would put the staffing decisions solely in the hands of the State Board of Education.
So now some board members want even more authority over the Permanent School Fund. Specifically, they want the board to oversee the jobs of the finance professionals who help run the PSF for Texas taxpayers.
The Texas Freedom Network and other observers have long been puzzled about why Rick Agosto, a San Antonio Democrat, has often sided with the State Board of Education’s far-right faction since his election in 2006. He has done so even when all other Democrats — and even some Republicans (who are not part of the far-right faction) — have refused to do so.
The revelations this weekend in the Dallas Morning News and the Austin American-Statesman about ethics concerns surrounding the board’s hiring of an investment consultant raise more questions about Mr. Agosto’s relationship to the board’s far-right faction. More importantly, perhaps, they reinforce the need for the Legislature to ensure that decisions about what Texas children learn in their public school classrooms are not held hostage to political games involving management of the $20.5 billion Permanent School Fund. Read on.
We told you a few weeks ago about the “How to Take America Back” conference, which this past weekend brought assorted conspiracy theorists, hate-mongers and lunatics on the far right to St. Louis from across the nation. (Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum was one of the event’s organizers.) On the agenda were workshops like “How to defend America from missile attack,” “How to recognize living under Nazis and communists,” and “How to counter the homosexual movement.” Altogether, it seems to have been a real “Lollapalooza” of right-wing nuttery.
Once again, the Texas affiliate of the far-right group Focus on the Family is having trouble getting its facts straight. This week the group is criticizing “the media and Austin liberals” for “distorting” the debate over the State Board of Education’s revision of social studies curriculum standards for public schools. The group is urging that the state board keep the names of “many notable figures in Texas and American History” in the new social studies standards, including Neil Armstrong, the first man to set foot on the moon.
Well, we don’t know any “Austin liberals” who want Armstrong removed from the standards. And TFN doesn’t want him out either. So perhaps it would be better for far-right pressure groups to direct their criticism toward their own ranks — and there’s a good reason for that.
Add Terri Leo to the list of irresponsible Texas State Board of Education members attacking the faith of teachers and others who are helping revise the state’s social studies curriculum standards. She’s also not telling the truth, and she knows it.
Could the Republican Party of Texas move even farther to the extreme right?
We’ll find out soon enough, apparently. Austin-based Quorum Report says Texas Eagle Forum leader Cathie Adams, who gives the word “extremist” new meaning, has thrown her hat in the ring to succeed outgoing Texas GOP chair Tina Benkiser. (Benkiser recently stepped down to join Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s re-election campaign.)
But how much more extreme can a party with this platform really get? A quick perusal of Ms. Adams’ public comments suggests what the answer may be: “a lot more extreme.” A few examples:
Question: What do you do if you are appointed to a position — say, to an expert curriculum review panel — for which you have no relevant credentials or qualifications?
Sounds impressive, I guess. But what is a certified court historian? I asked my friend Ed Darrell, who is an attorney, former speech writer and currently teaches social studies in the Dallas-area (and has a great blog called Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub). Ed’s not buying it:
There’s no certification process, but a person could be qualified as an expert for expert witness purposes, similar to the experts in the creationism trials.
I don’t think Barton could come close to qualifying as an expert in history.
First, he doesn’t hold a degree in the area.
Second, he has no professional training in the area.
Third, he doesn’t publish in peer-reviewed journals in the area.
Fourth, he doesn’t bother with the professional associations in history.
I can’t think of a single area in which Barton would qualify. But the ultimate test would be a case where he was accepted as an expert. Is there such a case?
Listen up, all you aspiring historians. Quit wasting your time in graduate school, and just convince a court to certify you. You might not get an job at a prestigious university, but the State Board of Education will always need “experts.” It worked for Barton.
A major story and two scathing editorials in the last few days show that concerns over possible financial shenanigans and vote-trading on the Texas State Board of Education are growing.
We told you last week about ethics concerns (see here and here) surrounding the state board’s management of the Permanent School Fund. Today the San Antonio Express-News looks closer at concerns over the involvement of San Antonio board member Rick Agosto. And on Friday the Express-News and Dallas Morning News published strong editorials about the issue. Read on.
(C) analyze reasons for and the impact of selected examples of civil disobedience in U.S. history such as the Boston Tea Party, Shay’s Rebellion, Henry David Thoreau’s refusal to pay a tax, the Underground Railroad, the Montgomery Bus Boycott, and Rosa Parks at the lunch counter. (Emphasis added.)
Ah, yes. Every child should hear the archetypal story of American civil disobedience — an exhausted Rosa Parks refuses to give up her seat and move the back of the bus lunch counter.
This can’t possibly be a surprise to anyone, right? The far right has spent decades using religion as a political weapon to divide Americans. But now the folks behind the Conservative Bible Project want to censor and rewrite the Bible to align scripture more closely with their fringe ideology.
We’re not making this up.
“Liberal bias has become the single biggest distortion in modern Bible translations,” says Conservapedia, which is hosting the project. (The folks at Conservapedia call their Web site “The Trustworthy Encyclopedia.” Orwellian, yes?)
That’s what happened earlier this spring at the Texas State Board of Education during the vote on new science curriculum standards for public schools, according to Kelly Shackelford of Texas’ Focus on the Family affiliate. When it looked like the board was about to pass science standards that did not include creationist-inspired criticisms of evolution, his group raised the alarm and:
“…basically what happened is, God unleashed his people.”
“It was clear that out of nowhere everything changed on a dime. And when we thought it was over — I mean, it was shocking. But it was God. And we just kind of stood their with our mouth open and said, ‘Praise the Lord.’”
That’s pretty much what religious-right pooh-bah Richard Land said last month at a Christian Coalition gathering in Florida. Reform efforts promoted by President Obama and congressional Democrats will lead to rationed care, which is based on Nazi ideology, Land said:
“I want to put it to you bluntly. What they are attempting to do in healthcare, particularly in treating the elderly, is not something like what the Nazis did. It is precisely what the Nazis did,” said Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission.
When it comes to right-wing extremism, sadly, Texas seems to provide an abundance — especially with political attacks on gay people.
Case in point: Congressman Louis Gohmert, an East Texas Republican. Last week during debate over hate crimes legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives, Rep. Gohmert launched into a diatribe comparing homosexuality to bestiality, necrophilia and pedophilia.
Yes, that’s right: Rep. Gohmert equates gay folks with people who have sex with animals, corpses and children.
“There are all kinds of perversions, what most of us would call perversions, some would say it sounds like fun, but most of us would say were perversions and there have been laws against them,” said Gohmert.
There are plenty of other examples. Shamefully, in 2009 we still see Texas politicians describing fellow human beings in the most vile and venomous ways. And then they cast votes against legislation intended to protect those people from acts of violence based on hatred for who they are.
They call these guys social studies “experts”? Please. If the Texas State Board of Education were to fine David Barton and Peter Marshall for each of the factual errors in their reviews of proposed (first drafts) social studies curriculum standards — as the board fines publishers for errors in textbooks — it would add up to a big chunk 0′ change. In fact, a partial analysis of the curriculum reviews from these two supposed social studies “experts” reveals a number of problems with basic historical facts, including distortions and misstatements as well as the simple misspelling of names.
We are not historians either, of course, but we haven’t been appointed to an “expert” panel helping guide what a generation of Texas students will learn in their social studies classrooms. In any case, for every correction noted below, we have linked to our sources – which include primary source documents — and welcome any corrections to the information we provide. Read on.
The news that President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize today has generated a variety of reactions, with great surprise being perhaps the most common. Reasonable people can disagree about who should have received the award, and TFN takes no position on that question. But we think most Americans — except perhaps those at the extremes, like certain members of our State Board of Education — might take some pride in seeing the leader of our nation recognized by the Nobel Committee.
So an e-mail sent out late this afternoon by the campaign of Texas Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst disappointed us:
This morning, after just eight months in office, President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. The President now joins a list of distinguished winners including Mother Teresa, Elie Wiesel, Nelson Mandela, and the Dalai Lama.
But did the President deserve this honor that was not even bestowed upon President Ronald Reagan, a President who ended the Cold War and whose efforts led to the fall of the Berlin Wall?
Please take a minute to let me know your opinion.
Thanks for your patriotism,
Sincerely,
David Dewhurst
Lieutenant Governor
“Thanks for your patriotism?” With all due restpect, Lt. Gov. Dewhurst, a “p” word did occur to us when we read your e-mail. But “patriotism” wasn’t the one.
The Dallas Morning News just dropped another ethics bomb on the Texas State Board of Education. The newspaper reports that two board members “have received thousands of dollars in gifts from a company seeking a lucrative contract with the board, records show, and those members have not reported the gifts on financial disclosure forms.”
Today’s story follows on others recently that have detailed ethics concerns regarding the board’s management of the Permanent School Fund. (See here, here and here.)
This requires close watching. Faced with growing a growing list of ethics concerns regarding the Texas State Board of Education’s management of the Permanent School Fund, the board’s Finance Committee is meeting on Friday to review ethics rules. The Austin American-Statesman has the story here. What isn’t clear, however, is whether some board members are more interested in weakening ethics rules than in cleaning up the problems.
The Dallas Morning News last weekend reported that Rick Agosto, D-San Antonio, and Rene Nuñez, D-El Paso, accepted 53 gifts worth more than $5,000 over a three-year period from AEW Capital Management of Boston. AEW reported the gifts in documents it submitted in its bid for a contract managing real estate investments for the board. The two board members, however, had not reported the gifts on financial disclosure forms.
The president of the Texas Freedom Network today called on state lawmakers to investigate ethics concerns swirling around the Texas State Board of Education’s management of the Permanent School Fund and to reconsider their failure this spring to let voters decide whether the board should continue to manage the fund.
Sometimes politicians find it easier to point fingers at everybody else for the problems they helped create themselves. That certainly seems true for Gail Lowe, the Republican from Lampasas who chairs the Texas State Board of Education.
The state board has been bombarded with thousands of e-mails and letters from people concerned about the ongoing revision of social studies curriculum standards for Texas public schools. We obtained through a Texas Public Information Act request copies of those e-mails as well as replies from board members. In her replies Ms. Lowe tries to shift blame for problems to teachers and the news media, and her words are as insulting as they are disingenuous.
As David Barton helps guide the revision of social studies curriculum standards for Texas public schools, it’s important to keep his agenda in mind. In fact, that agenda will be the focus of a conference for right-wing legislators Barton’s organization, WallBuilders, is hosting Nov. 5-8 in Dallas.
WallBuilders hopes to draw lawmakers from states around the country to its ProFamily Legislators Conference. The event’s speakers and session topics are all geared toward promoting Barton’s agenda: basing our nation’s laws and society on a fundamentalist Protestant interpretation of the Bible. The WallBuilders Web site promises that lawmakers will get ”a fresh perspective on the historical application of Scripture to public policy-making with a deeper look into what the Bible says about current issues.”
Does Texas politics drive you bananas? Then come monkey around with us at Texas Freedom Network’s 14th Annual Celebration on Thursday, Oct. 22, in Austin.
This is TFN’s biggest party and fundraiser of the year. The event includes great food, cash bar and a silent auction. And this year the National Comedy Theatre will provide the laughs while Rolling Stones cover band Sticks & Stones supplies the tunes.
The event is 7-10 p.m. at the Austin Music Hall, 208 Nueces, in downtown Austin
The denials came on the same day the state board’s Finance/Permanent School Fund Committee discussed whether the board should make any changes to its ethics policies. Some committee members argued that those policies should be clearer, should align more closely with policies for other state agencies and should make reporting requirements the same for board members and firms bidding for the board’s business. They also wanted to give board members time to review and possibly contest any questionable statements in bidders’ disclosure forms before those disclosures are made public.
State board chair Gail Lowe, R-Lampasas, said she especially wanted changes that would encourage board members to avoid even the perception of ethics problems when they carry out their official duties.
Well, that suggestion sounds good to us. Obeying the letter of the law might protect board members from prosecution, but it won’t necessarily assure the general public that members aren’t seeking private benefit from their official actions. For example, a policy might forbid or at least require disclosure of private contact with a bidder during a specified period. But why shouldn’t a public official voluntarily disclose other contacts outside that period, simply as a way to assure the public that there are no hidden personal agendas?
Moreover, wouldn’t it be in the best interests of all involved for a public official to recuse himself or herself from decisions regarding bidders with which he or she has had prior contact and possible business dealings? Doing so doesn’t suggest that public official has done anything wrong. To the contrary, doing so reassures constituents that decisions are being made in the best interests of the public good, not for personal gain.
Ms. Lowe is right: board members should act, when possible, in ways that avoid even the perception that something is not appropriate. That’s common sense.
But we would like a real answer to this question: why did Ms. Lowe and other members of the state board’s far-right faction vote as a bloc to hire a new investment consultant when other board members had voiced serious concerns about possible ethics problems involving that decision? Not only that, but the Permanent School Fund’s staff had rated the firm lower than the consultant the far-right bloc essentially voted to fire. And the firm the far-right bloc voted to hire had submitted a substantially higher bid.
If Ms. Lowe is really concerned about perceptions, she should seriously review and explain her own votes. So should her colleagues.
I’m not sure what the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) did to get on Don McLeroy’s bad side, but the deposed chair of the Texas State Board of Education has renewed his assault on the most prestigious science academy in the world. Only this time, he’s trying to insert his grievance in the state’s social studies curriculum.
Several groups of “writing teams” — made up primarily of Texas classroom teachers — were appointed by the state board earlier this year to draft revisions to Texas’ social studies curriculum standards. These groups met in Austin last week, continuing their work on a new draft of the standards, which the state board will vote on next spring. When these teachers arrived to begin their work last Thursday, they were given a hand-scribbled memo with some instructions from Dr. McLeroy. He had this surprising piece of advice for the team working on the “United States Government” standards:
“Science The importance of the National Academy of Science [sic] in scientific research — pros and cons!”
Didn’t see that one coming. The state board finished its revision to science standards more than six months ago, but it appears McLeroy just can’t let go of his beef with mainstream science.
Last week, we brought you some choice selections from cryptic, hand-scribbled memos Texas State Board of Education member Don McLeroy wrote to curriculum writers preparing the latest draft of social studies standards (“More McLeroy Malarkey, Part 1″). Here is Part 2.
To the “World History Studies” writing team, McLeroy suggests a few additions to the timeline of important events and people, including this one:
“Abram called at ~2000 BCE”
The most surprising part of this particular comment may be that McLeroy opts for the modern academic designation BCE (meaning “Before Common Era”), rather than the traditional BC (or “Before Christ”). In contrast, current SBOE chair Gail Lowe in her instructions to the board called for a return to the “traditional nomenclature BC/AD” because it has been used “for centuries in Western civilization.” A cynical person might wonder why McLeroy has declared war on “Christ” in the social studies standards, but I digress…
The most obvious problem with the inclusion of this new standard is the “call” language McLeroy proposes. The very notion that Abram was “called” by God is a religious belief (taken from Genesis 12:1-20) and is thus unsuitable for highlighting in a history course. Moreover, scholars propose a wide variety of dates for the life of Abram — and many biblical scholars question whether a historical figure named Abram/Abraham existed at all. In any case, there is little consensus on the matter, and World History standards are no place to propose firm dates when the scholarly community disagrees.
Texas voters will consider 11 amendments to the state constitution on Nov. 3. The Texas Freedom Network has taken no official position on any of the measures. But we could have predicted what far-right groups, such as David Barton’s WallBuilders, would say about one: putting more resources into university research. They don’t like it.
It’s hard to know how long will it take for State Republican Executive Committee members to realize how foolish they were to appoint Cathie Adams as chair of the Texas GOP this past weekend. After all, SREC members won’t be able to say they are “surprised” when Ms. Adams takes another flying leap off the rhetorical crazy cliff. Her record of extremism and self-righteous personal attacks goes back well over a decade. For example, here’s her sneering take on Texas Gov. Ann Richards in 1994 (from a June 7, 1994, Houston Chronicle article):
“She’s an anti-religious bigot. . . . How can people think she is Texas — down-home Ma Richards? I feel very insulted that she is representing me as a Texas woman. Most Texas women are ladylike and God-fearing. Ann Richards has none of those qualities.”
This is the latest development in the growing controversy over ethics concerns involving the state board’s management of the Permanent School Fund. The more than $20 billion fund pays for textbook purchases. The Texas Freedom Network has also called on state legislators to investigate ethics concerns swirling around the board.
All of this comes just months after the Texas Senate failed to give voters the opportunity to remove the state board’s authority over the Permanent School Fund and give it to a panel of finance experts. The Texas House had overwhelmingly approved measures doing so.
To the abundant evidence showing that ideologues and non-historians shouldn’t be deciding what students learn in their history classrooms, add another exhibit: far-right efforts to use our kids’ classrooms to rehabilitate the image of Joseph McCarthy and turn him into an American hero. Sadly, that’s what some members of the Texas State Board of Education and people they have appointed to help revise public school social studies curriculum standards are now trying to do.
McCarthy used his position in the Senate in the 1950s to publicly smear countless people with false charges that they were communists or sympathizers. He even accused entire organizations — such as the Democratic Party — of promoting treason. McCarthy’s witch hunts were so outrageous and shameful that even Republicans eventually turned on him. In 1954 the Senate voted to censure McCarthy. He then sank into relative obscurity and died a few years later at the age of 48.
But now right-wingers are once again promoting the nonsense that McCarthy was a truth-telling, anti-communist hero and patriot. And if they get their way, that’s what Texas history students will soon be learning in their public school classrooms.
“Church unity can never be a virtue that is preserved by allowing injustice, oppression, and psychological tyranny to go unchallenged. I will also no longer act as if I need a majority vote of some ecclesiastical body in order to bless, ordain, recognize, and celebrate the lives and gifts of gay and lesbian people in the life of the church.”
– Retired Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong, in a speech in which he declared that he will no longer argue about the status of gay and lesbian people in the church
“This was not a full representation of Republicans in the state of Texas, and it’s disappointing to me that the vote occurred with no discussion and was done by secret ballot. In fact, what’s happened is we’ve set the party back five years.”
Stay informed with TFN News Clips, a daily digest of news on issues involving the religious right, religious freedom, civil liberties and public education. Subscribe here.
Mercer uses the piece to criticize his opponent — Tim Tuggey — in the March 2010 Republican primary for the District 5 state board seat. (District 5 runs from northern Bexar County to southern Travis County and includes a number of Hill Country counties to the west.) Attacking your election opponent is typical politics, of course. So no surprise there.
But perhaps Mr. Mercer’s biggest targets aren’t on the ballot — teachers. His column includes misleading statements and outright falsehoods about the teachers working (as volunteers, by the way) on new social studies curriculum standards.
“[M]ost of the candy sold during this season has been dedicated and prayed over by witches. I do not buy candy during the Halloween season. Curses are sent through the tricks and treats of the innocent whether they get it by going door to door or by purchasing it from the local grocery store. The demons cannot tell the difference.”
Stay informed with TFN News Clips, a daily digest of news on issues involving the religious right, religious freedom, civil liberties and public education. Subscribe here.
The 2010 primary elections are in March, and candidates are lining up in a number of races. So we wanted to post this reminder on our comments policy:
Because of TFN’s nonprofit, tax-exempt status, TFN Insider posts and comments cannot endorse or oppose particular candidates for election. There is no restriction against discussing the relative qualities of candidates and their positions on issues. (In addition, we will try to keep readers informed about Web sites and other information relative to the candidates, regardless of their political party or affiliation.)
Thanks in advance for your understanding and help on this.
Well, this is an odd twist. David Bradley — a supposed champion of the wisdom of free markets — thinks the Texas State Board of Education will do a better job than the private sector in deciding whether it’s too risky to invest in charter schools. (Of course, some board members also think they know more about science and history than scientists and historians. So are you surprised?)
An article in the Austin American-Statesman today explains that Bradley, a Republican state board member from Beaumont Buna, wants the board to consider investing part of the Permanent School Fund’s $22 billion in facilities for charter schools. The chair of the state board’s Finance Committee and a longtime proponent of charter schools says he “would like to see if this a sector of the market that is mature enough and would offer some opportunity.”
Private investors don’t seem to think so. The Statesman points out that charter schools don’t have what investors typically look for: established financial track records, adequate cash reserves and long-term security.
“The noose has tightened around the necks of Christians to keep them from speaking out on certain moral issues. And it all was embodied in something called the Hate crimes bill that President Obama said was a major victory for America. I’m not sure if America was the beneficiary. … We have voted into office a group of people who are opposed to many of the fundamental Christian beliefs of our nation. And they hold to radical ideology, and they are beginning to put people sharing their points of view into high office. And not only that, they … have control of both houses of Congress.”
Stay informed with TFN News Clips, a daily digest of news on issues involving the religious right, religious freedom, civil liberties and public education. Subscribe here.
It appears that the Texas State Board of Education’s social conservatives and their supporters have embarked on a new campaign of blanket smears against almost everyone involved in the revision of social studies curriculum standards. And the attacks increasingly sound almost like unhinged rants.
This week state board member Ken Mercer, R-San Antonio, and Bill Ames, appointed to a curriculum panel by board member Don McLeroy, R-College, are both attacking “leftists” involved in the social studies revision. Their targets include teachers, Texas Education Agency professional staff, the news media and (of course) the Texas Freedom Network.
A major education group will present the Texas Freedom Network with its 2009 National Intellectual Freedom Award this month for our efforts to help teachers counter political attacks on sound curriculum standards in Texas public schools.
We are very grateful and profoundly humbled by this honor from the 50,000-member National Council of Teachers of English. TFN President Kathy Miller will accept the award at the NCTE’s national conference in Philadelphia on Nov. 19.
But we also think it’s important to highlight the hard work of dedicated teachers who have been promoting sound curriculum standards in language arts as well as science, social studies and other Texas classrooms. They truly have been in the trenches with us in this long fight to ensure that Texas schoolchildren get an education based on sound scholarship, not political and ideological agendas.
Passing along some information about a very interesting forum on the State Board of Education coming up in Austin this Saturday, November 7:
Panel on “Textbooks, TAKS, and the State Board of Education”
Speakers include Mark Grayson, former textbook representative to the SBOE
for Science for Holt, Rinehart and Winston, State Rep. Donna Howard (D-Austin),
and Dr. Harrison Keller, Vice Provost for Education Policy and Research at
the University of Texas at Austin.
One thing you can say about Texas State Board of Education member Terri Leo: she can say the most absurd things with a straight face. In an article published by a conservative Web site, East Texas Review, Leo claims “conservatives” (as she defines them, anyway) are improving education standards that will help students do better on standardized tests. She notes, in particular, the board’s approval of new curriculum standards for English/language arts and reading in 2008:
“That’s why we have conservatives on the State Board of Education. . . . The conservatives took issue with our standards, and that’s why they changed.”
“The culture war over science education, the teaching of evolution, is going to be there, no matter what. Education is too important not to politicize.”
Stay informed with TFN News Clips, a daily digest of news on issues involving the religious right, religious freedom, civil liberties and public education. Subscribe here.
This news came as Democrat Michael Soto, a literature professor at Trinity University in San Antonio, announced that he will run for the seat. The district is strongly Democratic, and Mr. Soto had already begun lining up support from other elected officials, such as state Sen. Leticia Van de Putte and former board member Joe Bernal, both San Antonio Democrats. Burnt Orange Report has more about Mr. Soto here.
Without Mr. Agosto, the board’s far-right faction would have a harder time getting a majority of votes on controversial issues in coming years, such as the adoption of new textbooks in science (scheduled for 2011, although budget issues could change that) and social studies (2012). On the other hand, seven other board seats are up for election in 2010. The results of those races could also alter the board’s balance of power.
Stay informed with TFN News Clips, a daily digest of news on issues involving the religious right, religious freedom, civil liberties and public education. Subscribe here.
We have spent the last couple of weeks combing through our files on Cathie Adams. Ms. Adams headed the far-right Texas Eagle Forum for 16 years until her appointment as Texas Republican Party chair in October. She has had plenty to say over the years, much of it ranging from bizarre and kooky to vicious and truly offensive. We have already reported on some of that here and here. But we thought you’d like to see more pearls of wisdom from Ms. Adams — after all, she now heads the political party that controls every statewide elected office in Texas.
We’ll continue this series over the next week or so, but let’s start with Ms. Adams’ loathing for the United Nations and her warnings about “one world” government. Adams’ rhetoric has made her sound much like the wild-eyed fanatics who spent the 1990s shouting about the UN’s “black helicopters” and “jack-booted thugs” terrorizing Americans and destroying freedom. She mixes that strain of extremist paranoia with a hefty dose of “end times” theology as well.
“(T)he ideological, political, and even some financial links among TFN-TCSS-teachers’ unions-TEA staff-review panels-and SBOE liberals seem unmistakable.”
Oh please. He must have forgotten to throw in “communists” and “fellow travelers” to the conspiracy mix.
We continue our look at the extremist statements that Cathie Adams, the new chair of the Texas Republican Party, has made over the years. Today we look at Adams’ alarming views about religious freedom in America. She seems to agree that Americans are free to worship as they choose, but she wants government to make it clear whose religious beliefs are better than all the others.
“They just kind of say, ‘Don’t do it.’ And then before prom, they say, ‘Don’t go to Motel 6.’”
– Tracey Bark, a Frisco High junior, discussing the abstinence-only sex education she received in her freshman health class.
Stay informed with TFN News Clips, a daily digest of news on issues involving the religious right, religious freedom, civil liberties and public education. Subscribe here.
As we end (for now) our series of posts looking at extremist statements Cathie Adams has made over the years, we present some of what the new Texas Republican Party chair has said in the past about gay men and lesbians. She has been both contemptuous and absurdly contradictory in her statements about the right of gay and lesbian Americans to live free from hatred and discrimination.
Up next in our series on new Texas Republican Party Chairwoman Cathie Adams: her anti-science views and peculiar anti-government paranoia, even when it comes to bipartisan, common-sense measures dealing with public health and children.
Next in our series on Cathie Adams, the new chair of the Texas Republican Party: her almost unhinged hatred for former President Bill Clinton and his wife, current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Far-right politicians, commentators and activists have targeted the Clintons with venomous attacks over the years. Adams has been no exception. She has even implied that the Clintons were somehow involved in the murder of former aides, particularly Vince Foster (whose death in 1993 was ruled a suicide by multiple authorities).
Are Texas Republicans already looking to dump Cathie Adams, the state party’s newly appointed chair? Gardner Selby of the Austin American-Statesman writes that Adams already has an opponent in next year’s June election for party chair: Tom Mechler of Amarillo. He reports that former Texas GOP chair George Strake is backing Mechler’s bid to replace Adams when the party meets at its June convention.
Selby notes that some Republicans are concerned that Adams is too “sharp-edged.” That’s putting it mildly. Adams can barely open her mouth without some extremist nonsense tumbling out of it. She has even compared President Obama to Adolf Hitler. Strake says he hopes Adams will decide not to seek a full term as chair in June:
“We can’t afford the luxury of a blood bath right now. We’ve got to regroup, reorganize and get on down the road. We’re in a battle for survival right now.”
The developing civil war between traditional conservatives and far-right extremists in the Texas GOP should be interesting to watch.
“I think he doesn’t understand what we’ve done. If he depended on the San Antonio newspaper and the Austin American Statesman and the Texas Freedom Network — they make us out to be awful sometimes.”
“I found it offensive that she repeatedly brought it up. By the fourth time she mentioned it, I felt God wanted me to express how I felt about the matter, so I did. But my tone was downright apologetic. I said, ‘Regarding your homosexuality, I think that’s bad stuff.’”
One of the most puzzling things about the debate over health insurance reform has been the religious right’s strident opposition. If the movement’s leaders didn’t constantly remind you that they are pastors and people of faith, you’d never know it from their comments about health care.
Instead of honest proposals for how our society can make sure the sick and vulnerable get the care they need (didn’t Jesus talk about that?), we’ve heard religious-right leaders rail against taxes, a supposed “government takeover” of health care and fictional “death panels.”
Case in point: today’s e-mail from Rick Scarborough, who founded the Lufkin-based group Vision America to “inform and mobilize Pastors and their congregations to become salt and light, becoming pro-active in restoring Judeo-Christian values in America.”
“As a religious right guy, I’m thinking there was a guy named Jesus who had some things to say about these kinds of concepts. And I don’t want to live in a society that lets a few test cases die on the steps of the hospital. I can’t go there.”
We have already told you about David Barton and Peter Marshall, the two absurdly unqualified “experts” placed on a social studies curriculum panel by far-right members of the Texas State Board of Education. Now other bloggers have been looking at Marshall’s claims downplaying the influence of Enlightenment thinkers — and promoting the Bible’s influence — on the Founders’ writing of the Constitution.
Ed Brayton, whose Dispatches from the Culture Wars blog has kept an eye on the curriuclum battles in Texas, reports about Marshall’s nonsense here. He provides links to some interesting background on Marshall’s claims. Some bloggers are reporting that Marshall has distorted the work of a University of Houston scholar in an effort to promote those claims. Check it out.
Religious-right groups and Republicans have charged that taxpayers would be funding abortions if any private health insurers that cover the procedure also accept federal subsidies for premiums under proposed health care reform legislation. That would be true, they say, even if individual abortion procedures are paid for out of a separate pool of privately paid premium dollars, not public subsidies for premiums. So the U.S. House voted to bar private insurers that accept those premium subsidies from covering abortion.
Now reporters have been checking into insurance plans offered by the Republican Party and religious-right groups. What did they find? Yup. You guessed it.
The GOP is doing its darndest to quickly move on from an embarrassing revelation — that even as congressional Republicans insist that the health care overhaul does not cover abortions, the national party’s own health plan covers elective procedures.
“If what we were doing in the classrooms was that liberal, the state of Texas would be a liberal state because we’ve all been teaching for many, many years. I don’t see any evidence that Texas is a liberal state.”
It really was only a matter of time. For months the Houston mayoral election focused on issues important to most working families in the city — issues like crime, transportation and economic development. Oh sure, there were occasional subtle references by far-right political activists to the fact that candidate Annise Parker, the current city controller, is a lesbian. But an organized anti-gay smear campaign didn’t develop. That is, it didn’t develop apparently until now, with Parker facing former city attorney Gene Locke in a runoff election on Dec. 12.
A cluster of socially conservative Houstonians is planning a campaign to discourage voters from choosing City Controller Annise Parker in the December mayoral runoff because she is a lesbian, according to multiple ministers and conservatives involved in the effort.
The group is motivated by concerns about a “gay takeover” of City Hall, given that two other candidates in the five remaining City Council races are also openly gay, as well as national interest driven by the possibility that Houston could become the first major U.S. city to elect an openly gay woman.
And just who are the leaders behind this coming anti-gay smear campaign? Two religious-right leaders long familiar to the Texas Freedom Network: Dave Welch and Steven Hotze.
For your convenience (and some grins), we repost Ms. Garner’s comment from today here. Enjoy.
Texas Freedom Network is an aggressive, leftwing, political organization that is completely out of step with today’s parents who want their children to learn foundational skills that will help them to become well-informed leaders of tomorrow.
TFN has a well-defined political/social agenda for our school children; and the purpose of TFN is to practice the politics of personal destruction on the conservative members of the Texas State Board of Education and anyone else who holds the same principled beliefs.
Here’s a new one for the “why it’s a bad idea to allow ideologues to write history standards” file — a file that is growing by the day, thanks to the Texas State Board of Education (SBOE).
Today’s example comes from the Rev. Peter Marshall, appointed earlier this year by far-right SBOE members Barbara Cargill, R-The Woodlands, and Cynthia Dunbar, R-Richmond, to the “expert” panel advising the board on new social studies curriculum standards. (Read about Marshall’s appalling lack of qualifications here.) Marshall writes a weekly commentary on his “Peter Marshall Ministries” Web site, which typically consists of boiler-plate attacks on liberals, communists and moderate Republicans, all of whom supposedly pose an imminent threat to America’s very existence (in Marshall’s bizarre theology, at any rate). In this week’s commentary — entitled “Alien Invasion” – Marshall proposes an alarming solution to the tragic shooting in Fort Hood:
Apparently, there are about 4000 Muslims in the United States Military. They should be immediately examined — all of them.
Now before you go and jump to the conclusion that Marshall is suggesting the government round up American Muslims and force them into detention camps (à la the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II), let’s hear him out.
“Elsewhere in this volume she talks about creationism, saying she ‘didn’t believe in the theory that human beings — thinking, loving beings — originated from fish that sprouted legs and crawled out of the sea’ or from ‘monkeys who eventually swung down from the trees.’”
– From a New York Timesreview of Sarah Palin’s new book, Going Rogue. Palin, of course, was John McCain’s 2008 vice-presidential running mate, putting her shocking anti-science views (among other troubling things) within a heartbeat of the Oval Office.
Stay informed with TFN News Clips, a daily digest of news about politics and the religious right. Subscribe here.
Peter Morrison is one of a number of right-wing extremists Texas State Board of Education members have placed on social studies curriculum committees. We have noted Morrison’s nativist and anti-government screeds in the past. Now he is using this month’s mass murder at Fort Hood as an excuse for a shocking, full-throated, xenophobic rant. From Tuesday’s installment of the “Peter Morrison Report” e-newsletter:
“The Fort Hood massacre was the predictable result of decades of massive immigration from third world countries, affirmative action, enforcement of political correctness and ‘celebration’ of diversity and multiculturalism. All of these policies would be bad enough on their own, but when combined they result in a prescription for disaster, on both a small and large scale.”
Morrison also bizarrely uses this horrible event to portray President Obama as a bigot:
The Texas State Board of Education has made clear that it will hold a public hearing on proposed social studies curriculum standards in January. But far-right pressure groups apparently decided to preempt that hearing today.
Despite no prior public indication from the board that there would be extensive testimony on the standards today, nearly two dozen people have signed up to testify about the proposed social studies standards this afternoon. And the list of testifiers is a “who’s who” of far-right pressure groups. Speakers include MerryLynn Gerstenschlager from Texas Eagle Forum, Peggy Venable from Americans for Prosperity, Jonathan Saenz from the Free Market Foundation Focus on the Family-Texas and Brooke Terry from Texas Public Policy Foundation.
And get this: Nancy Jones from Texas Tea Party also signed up to speak. That should be enlightening. Will she bring along signs accusing teachers of being Nazis and communists? Will she shout down any other speakers? From what we’ve seen around the country, you never know with the Tea Party folks. Oh, the drama…
“It’s pretty clear the organizational Republican Party in the state has been pretty much totally captured by the extreme right, with Cathie Adams being the most recent example by winning the vote in their executive committee.”
It seems that some folks are now driving around with bumper stickers that read, “Pray for Obama: Psalm 109:8.” What does that Bible verse say?
“Let his days be few; and let another take his office.”
And what does that mean? The verse that immediately follows clears up any ambiguity:
“Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.”
So now we have extremists using Bible verses to pray that God will kill the president of the United States. Of course, it would be absurd and offensive to suggest that all Christians agree with such sentiments. Almost certainly, nearly all would be appalled to learn about this. But some folks — like the Rev. Peter Marshall — don’t seem to have a problem suggesting that all Muslims be treated as potential criminals because of the actions of a few (or one).
“There’s a cultural war going on in our society today. I feel that homosexual behavior is an affront to the family values of one man-one woman, and homosexual behavior, to any society that’s embraced it, has led to the extinction of that society.”
Today far-right members of the Texas State Board of Education made it clear that they no longer want input from teachers, academic experts and other community members who have been helping revise the state’s social studies curriculum standards. Republicans Pat Hardy of Fort Worth and Bob Craig of Lubbock (neither of whom are liberals) as well as Democrat Mavis Knight of Dallas all insisted that continued input from teachers and academics could only help the board approve solid standards. But their proposals to reconvene the curriculum writing teams either this month or in January to continue fine-tuning their draft standards were met with solid resistance from the board’s far-right faction. The faction also opposed inviting the curriuclum writers and the board’s appointed panel of social studies “experts” to participate in discussions and a public hearing in January and March.
This really shouldn’t come as a surprise. Since the beginning of this process, far-right board members and their allies have harshly and unfairly criticized the work of the curriculum teams — especially the teachers on those teams. They have charged that the teams are made up of radical “educrats” (teachers) who were using the standards to promote “multiculturalism” and “anti-free market” views. They claim that the teams are promoting a “war on Christmas” and undermining Christian values. Then yesterday far-right activists complained to the board that the curriculum teams had crafted standards that have a “leftist bias” and that portray America in a negative light. (Steven Schafersman has a helpful summary of yesterday’s testimony before the board in a comment to an earlier post here.)
The complaints are worse than absurd — they have also been deeply insulting to the hard-working volunteers on the writing teams. And they reveal the contempt far-right extremists on and off the board have for anybody who doesn’t share their narrow political views. These extremists have been particularly savage in their attacks on teachers and respected teacher organizations such as the Texas Council for the Social Studies.
So what’s the significance of today’s reckless decisions by the board to move on without the help of their own curriculum panels? Read on.
“I think we’re going to see the same Cathie Adams we’ve seen for two decades. That’s somebody who uses extreme and divisive rhetoric to promote a political agenda and if you get in her way, whether you’re Republican or not, she’ll go after you.”
This month marks the 46th anniversary of President Kennedy’s assassination in Dallas. We all remember that the assassin was a deranged, dysfunctional radical. But many — especially, of course, those of us born afterward — might not remember the hate and extremism that framed President Kennedy’s trip to Texas that November. Mark Warren, writing for Esquire, recalls it. And he worries about similarities to today:
“As I am from Texas, home over the years to some of the most wonderful and ridiculous members of congress, sometimes situated in the same person, I thought of my home delegation, and in my mind formed the image of the skinhead reprobate from Tyler, Louie Gohmert. Characterized chiefly by the blankness behind his eyes, Gohmert has the face of a hooligan and the politesse to match. Stinking of contempt, no greater reactionary is to be found in the Congress today. And certainly it is people like him who have abetted the toxic atmosphere that holds in our current politics. He has screamed that the president is a ’socialist!’ perhaps louder and longer than anyone else in his caucus (which is quite a distinction), he is a birther who believes that Obama is an alien Muslim, and he has said that the president’s health care plan will ‘absolutely kill senior citizens. They’ll put them on lists and force them to die early.’
That got your attention, didn’t it? That’s what one far-right group in Texas was counting on today when it sent out a hair-on-fire fundraising e-mail with that subject line. We wanted to give you a taste of how far-right extremists are trying to frighten and shake down folks for money these days. From the e-mail:
“Just days ago, President Obama signed the so-called ‘Hate Crimes’ bill into law. This bill is an attack on religious freedom like never before. We must not stand by and do nothing! This new federal law could actually criminalize pastors and ordinary citizens who speak out biblically against homosexuality.”
For the far right, opposing proposed health insurance reform isn’t enough. Now they want people to protest by refusing health insurance coverage that reform efforts might make available to them. Check out this excerpt from an e-mail fundraising appeal from the executive director of the United States Justice Foundation:
“I’m asking you to flatly refuse to buy government insurance. And, if needed, the United States Justice Foundation (USJF) will represent you in court, to defend your decision. You have my word.”
Oh, goodie. But will the USFJ also pay for treatment if that uninsured patriot gets cancer or is crippled in an auto accident? And what about his kids? Will USJF pay for their hospitalization when they can’t get the asthma medicine or insulin they need because Mom and Dad are unemployed and have lost their health insurance?
It’s bad enough when legislators try to use government to promote their own religious views over those of everybody else. It’s even worse when politicians try to use the courts to do it. So anyone who supports religious freedom should be concerned that former state Rep. Rick Green — a Republican from Dripping Springs southwest of Austin — is seeking a seat on the Texas Supreme Court. And if he wins, Texas will have a justice who not only opposes separation of church and state but also excuses torture by our own government.
Concerned Women for America — which exists “to protect and promote Biblical values among all citizens” — tells us in an e-mail blast that Americans don’t like pornography:
“While cultural elites downplay the negative influences of pornography, a new study by Harris Interactive shows that the American public is not so accepting of it.”
We didn’t find the poll on the Harris Web site, but we did see a related Oct. 28 press release from the far-right group Morality in Media:
“Overall, 76% of U.S. adults disagree that ‘viewing hardcore adult pornography on the Internet is morally acceptable’ and 74% disagree that “viewing hardcore adult pornography on the Internet provides, generally, harmless entertainment,” according to a survey commissioned by Morality in Media and conducted by Harris Interactive.”
That may very well be the case, but we couldn’t help but recall how often the far right blames sexual immorality of any sort on “liberals.” In fact, the Morality in Media press release points a finger at the Clinton administration in the 1990s: “Under President Clinton, the Justice Department turned its back to the proliferation of hardcore adult pornography on the Internet.”
And then we were reminded of a Harvard study we saw earlier this year. The study indicated that eight of the top 10 online porn-consuming states lean Republican and voted for John McCain in 2008. Six of the 10 states rated as the smallest consumers of online pornography voted for Barack Obama. Hmmm…
“The fundamental dignity of every person, our right to be free, and the freedom to make moral choices are gifts endowed by God, our creator. However, it is not my personal calling as a pastor in America to comment or interfere in the political process of other nations.”
Drive down almost any street in America and you can see it’s that time of year again. Christmas trees strapped to cars or in the back of pickup trucks headed home. Glittering string-lights stretched across eaves and wrapped around shrubs. Colorful holiday displays in front yards. Church signs with messages of peace and the holy birth.
It should be clear to most people that Christmas is thriving in America today — unless your post box or e-mail account has been filled with paranoid messages from religious-right groups. This is prime fundraising season for the religious right, and the phony “War on Christmas” in America is a big moneymaker for those seeking to frighten people about a supposed anti-Christian conspiracy by “secular humanists,” atheists and assorted other demons.
An e-mail from the far-right group In God We Trust today illustrates our point:
The national advocacy group In God We Trust today condemned efforts of national atheist organizations and left-wing legal groups aimed at terrorizing Americans into not celebrating Christmas.
“I do absolutely notice that some of the conservative Christians who are members of Congress . . . it seems like the leftist media treats them a little bit different.”
Right now, TFN is engaged in another critical debate over the future of our children’s education. You have been reading on this blog about efforts by far-right extremists to rewrite history and politicize social studies classrooms. That battle will stretch well into 2010.
So we’re asking for your help. A few generous TFN donors have established a 2009 Matching Gift Challenge. Every dollar you donate before the December 31 deadline will be matched dollar-for-dollar – up to the $50,000 limit of our matching gift.
“We promote respect for God and all His creations; family unity; limited government; private property; free enterprise and the rule of righteous law.”
– The Do Right Foundation’s mission statement. The foundation has financially supported a number of white supremacist groups and familiar far-right organizations such as the American Family Association and Discovery Institute.
Stay informed with TFN News Clips, a daily digest of news about politics and the religious right. Subscribe here.
With Houston’s Dec. 12 mayoral runoff election just a little over a week away, the far-right Houston Area Pastor Council is intensifying its vicious anti-gay campaign against one of the candidates. The group’s leader, Dave Welch, has joined with other religious-righters in a coordinated attack on mayoral candidate Annise Parker — currently the city’s controller — because she is a lesbian. On Wednesday Welch continued his attacks in an e-mail to HAPC activists. His e-mail includes an essay he wrote for the far-right World Net Daily Web site.
In case you were wondering, it’s legal to wish people a “Merry Christmas.” Of course, no one really doubted that. But attorney Kelly Coghlan has decided to take the phony ”War on Christmas” nonsense to even more absurd levels by letting people know that federal law officially calls December 25 “Christmas.”
Now Coghlan has circulated an e-mail — audience unclear, but presumably parents and perhaps school districts on his address list — reminding them that Christmas is a legal holiday. Thanks for the news flash, Kelly.
His purpose, of course, is to reinforce the misperception that Christmas is somehow under attack in America. Never mind that the vast majority of Americans celebrate the birth of Jesus with public prayer, decorations and festivities every year. And Americans have been wishing each other “Merry Christmas” since our nation’s founding without having to be reminded that it’s a federal holiday.
Even more ironic is that social conservatives like Coghlan are now turning to government as a justification for wishing people “Merry Christmas.” He even reminds readers that no one goes around wishing “Happy Holidays” before other federal holidays like Labor Day.
It’s as if folks like Coghlan have no idea how absurd they sound. And perhaps they don’t. In any case, they have become a caricature of prim-and-proper busybodies constantly pointing out the obvious to everybody else.
Texas Republican Party Chair Cathie Adams isn’t the only right-winger to attack President Obama’s personal faith and make other bizarre charges about the nation’s chief executive. Plenty of other political figures and commentators on the fringe right continue to suggest (or claim outright) that the president is a closet Muslim, that he hates white people and that he’s a Marxist (or Nazi). But usually elected officials are little more careful. Not so in the case of the mayor of the Memphis-area city of Arlington, Tenn.
Arlington Mayor Russell Wiseman is charging that ”our muslim president” deliberately chose the date of his nationally televised announcement on Afghanistan troop deployments last week so that his speech would preempt what Wiseman apparently considers a quintessential Christian television program: “The Charlie Brown Christmas Special” that kids have been watching annually for more than four decades.
Is everybody at Texas Eagle Forum obsessed with Adolf Hitler? The far-right group’s former leader (and now Texas Republican Party chair) Cathie Adams infamously compared President Obama to Hitler in September. Now new TEF boss Pat Carlson is referring to Hitler in an e-mail to far-right activists in which she attacks the United Nations and mainstream science on climate change:
Can David Barton really be serious? The head of Texas-based WallBuilders, which opposes separation of church and state, now says that Congress is violating the Constitution when its members meet on Sundays, the Christian Sabbath.
Really.
In an e-mail to WallBuilders activists, Barton is criticizing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., for having senators work on health insurance reform legislation on Sunday.
“Sunday sessions have been extremely rare because of the U. S. Constitution’s Article I ‘Sundays Excepted’ Clause, which excludes Sunday from the federal lawmaking process. The Framers of the Constitution held great respect for the Christian Sabbath and therefore removed it from the federal lawmaking calendar.”
We told you that a group of anti-gay extremists has launched a coordinated attack campaign against Annise Parker, an openly gay candidate in Houston’s mayoral runoff on Dec. 12. Now the Houston Chronicle is reporting that the finance chairman and a finance committee member for Parker’s opponent, Gene Locke, may have helped bankroll those attacks from the fringe right.
Lorenzo Sadun, a University of Texas mathematics professor, has announced that he is dropping his bid to replace State Board of Education member Cynthia Dunbar, R-Richmond, in the 2010 elections. That leaves only one announced Democratic candidate for the seat, education consultant Judy Jennings of Austin. Dunbar still faces Williamson County teacher Rebecca Osborne in the March Republican Primary.
In an e-mail to supporters today, education consultant Judy Jennings of Austin responded to the announcement from University of Texas mathematics professor Lorenzo Sadun that he is withdrawing from the race for Cynthia Dunbar’s seat on the Texas State Board of Education. Sadun’s withdrawal leaves Jennings as the only announced Democratic candidate for the seat. Dunbar faces Republican teacher Rebecca Osborne in the March GOP primary.
In the religious right’s continuing attacks on health insurance reform efforts in Washington, yesterday the Texas-based Heritage Alliance blasted out an e-mail warning far-right activists not “to despair” over the possible passage of legislation intended to make sure every American has access to affordable health care. To give in to despair, the e-mail says, would be a sin:
Quorum Report, an online political news site (subscription required) based in Austin, is reporting that State Republican Executive Committee member Brian Russell, an Austin attorney, is seeking Dunbar’s seat. According to QR, Russell says Dunbar recruited him to run.
TFN has exposed and documented Dunbar’s extremism in the past. In her 2008 book, One Nation Under God, Dunbar called public education a “subtle tool of perversion,” “tyrannical” and unconstitutional. During the 2008 president election, Dunbar attacked then-candidate Barack Obama as a Marxist and a terrorist sympathizer who wanted another attack on America so that he could declare martial law and throw out the Constitution. Dunbar has also been a leader of efforts by the State Board of Education’s far-right faction to politicize our children’s social studies classrooms and to promote creationist arguments against evolution in science classrooms.
According to reporter Kate Alexander at the Austin American-Statesman,David Bradley is confirming that fellow Texas State Board of Education member Cynthia Dunbar will not seek re-election to her seat next year. Bradley told the Statesman that Dunbar recently began teaching at the Liberty University School of Law in Virginia and commutes from her home in Texas. The late Rev. Jerry Falwell founded Liberty University.
Bradley, R-Beaumont Buna, won re-election to his seat last year. The seats of two other far-right board members — Don McLeroy, R-College Station, and Ken Mercer, R-San Antonio — are up for election next year. So far McLeroy and Mercer appear to be seeking re-election.
So what happens if Brian Russell, a State Republican Executive Committee member from Austin, replaces Cynthia Dunbar on the Texas State Board of Education after next year’s elections? Russell told the Texas Tribune today that he wants to keep education policy “moving in the direction we’ve been going in.” From the Tribune:
Russell, who previously endorsed Dunbar and seeks to be her replacement, has nothing but kind words for Dunbar: “I think she’s had a terrific record of achievement on the board. She’s been a problem solver and someone who’s exhibitied a lot of leadership.”
“My advantage is that I haven’t been a lightning rod,” he said.
“They think because there are 92 precincts in McLennan County, we need to have 92 precinct chairs. What they fail to understand is about half of those precincts are minority precincts, and you’re not going to find any Republicans in them.”
Much of the attention on the angry Tea Party mobs over the summer and fall has been focused on their blind opposition to health insurance reform and government generally. But religious-right activists and their goals haven’t been completely absent from Tea Party ranks. In fact, their presence is one way you know that the call for limited government is little more than a political slogan — the Tea Partiers want to limit government, except when they don’t. An example:
The Tea Party movement is supposed to be all about keeping the government out of your business. But if some California members get their way, the state will force public schoolchildren to sing Christmas carols.
Texas State Board of Education member Cynthia Dunbar has now released a statement explaining that she will not seek re-election to her seat next year. She used her announcement to endorse Brian Russell, an Austin attorney and State Republican Executive Committee member, as her replacement. Russell has already announced his intention to seek the seat and said Dunbar recruited him.
From Dunbar’s announcement:
“I promised them that I would be a statesman and not a career politician and that I would get in, get the job done and get out. That is exactly what I have done. I know it is common for politicians to make that promise and then conveniently forget it once they have reached the ranks of popularity and incumbent security. However, I am satisfied that I have been effective in accomplishing all that I had promised and I intend to keep my word to my constituents. I have kept my finger on the pulse of my district, which has enabled me to know what they ultimately want and I have not been deterred by minority opposition.”
We’re unsure what job Dunbar thinks she finished. She has spent her four years on the board dumbing curriculum standards with political nonsense. But battles over how those standards are implemented in new science and social studies textbooks won’t come until 2011, at the earliest.
That’s one reason why Dunbar’s departure from the board after next year will represent an important victory for Texas families who want their children to get a sound education, not right-wing political indoctrination, in their public school classrooms. Still, Russell is cut much from the same cloth as Dunbar. His presence on the board would help ensure that our public schools remain in the crossfire of the religious right’s divisive culture wars. That means the 2010 elections are still very important.
It seems that Brian Russell, anointed by Cynthia Dunbar as her desired replacement on the Texas State Board of Education, doesn’t much like the Texas Freedom Network. And we’re such nice folks. Go figure. Anyway, just a few days before word got out that Russell is seeking Dunbar’s board seat, the Austin attorney and his fellow State Republican Executive Committee (SREC) members passed a resolution attacking TFN as a “far left-wing fringe group.”
Well, we’re fascinated that SREC members spend their time worrying about TFN. But more than anything, the resolution itself also offers a roadmap of sorts for the political agenda Russell wants to promote on the State Board of Education.
The religious right once again thought a campaign of fear and bigotry would work. Tens of thousands of dollars funded attack mailers sent out to Houston voters. The same voters heard dark warnings about gays taking over their city’s government. Families and children, they were told, were in danger. It was, in short, a classic smear campaign designed to persuade voters that what mattered most when they entered the voting booth wasn’t what the candidates said about fiscal matters, transportation, city services and other issues typically important in a mayoral election. Oh no, they were told. What mattered most was the private life of one of the candidates and who she loved. What mattered most was that Annise Parker is gay, regardless of the fact that she was running on a record put together during a career that included six years on the City Council and six years as city controller.
Sometimes it’s instructive to note the bizarre and bitter paranoia that infects the far right in America. Texas offers plenty of examples, including the folks at Texas Eagle Forum. In fact, TEF’s new president, Pat Carlson, seems to harbor the same fear of everything foreign that the group’s past president, Cathie Adams, does.
In a new e-mail report to TEF activists (dated Dec. 14) from the Copenhagen conference on global climate change, for example, Carlson rails against efforts by the Obama administration to cooperate with foreign countries on cutting emissions of greenhouse gases. “Obama is still campaigning but now it is for world leader,” she sneers.
But toward the end of e-mail, she most clearly reveals her xenophobia, arguing that foreigners simply want to destroy the American way of life:
“The world hates America because of jealousy and because Americans are a good and generous people.”
Oh, good grief. The Pew Global Attitudes Project shows that global attitudes toward the United States vary over time and by region, but generally our country is viewed favorably in many developed and developing countries around the world. And the U.S. image globally has actually been improving. But Texas right-wingers like Pat Carlson see only enemies surrounding us — a paranoia that simply reinforces extremist politics in this country.
The Baptist Joint Committee, which advocates out of traditional Baptist principles for separation of church state, has listed its top stories from 2009 dealing with religious liberty. Curriculum battles over science and social studies in Texas public schools missed the Top 10 but got an “honorable mention.” Because of the BJC’s work as a legal organization, its list of top stories leans heavily toward controversies involving the courts and constitutional issues. Among the group’s Top 10 stories:
David Souter’s replacement by Sonia Sotomayor on the U.S. Supreme Court
A court ruling against Christian-themed license plates in South Carolina
Controversial bans against Muslim headscarves
U.S. foreign affairs and the role of religion
Concern by progressives over whether the Obama administration will strongly support separation of church and state
From science to sex education and issues like private school vouchers, religious freedom and civil liberties, the Texas Freedom Network is engaged on numerous fronts in defending mainstream values against the religious right in Texas. We are fortunate to have the help of a dedicated band of student interns to help us here at the office, at the Capitol and at the State Board of Education. In addition to our regular internships, TFN also sponsors a “Legislative Academy” every two years for students interested in learning more about public policy advocacy and the legislative process. This year we have six hard-working, dedicated interns in our Lege Academy program. We thought you might like to hear from one about her experiences, Mary Tuma. Mary is a senior fellow in journalism at the University of Texas at Austin:
