Archive for March, 2009

In Defense of Ignorance?

March 31, 2009

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.

Follow Testimony on TX Sex Ed Bills Online

March 31, 2009

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.)

6:08 – Rep. Castro notes the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund’s groundbreaking report on sexuality education in Texas public schools.

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.

Talking about Sex (Ed) at the Capitol

March 31, 2009

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.

We will keep you updated about today’s hearing. Meanwhile, you can read a press release from TFN here.tF

Update: KVUE-TV News has more on TFN’s Capitol press briefing here.

On ‘Lacking a Moral Compass’

March 30, 2009

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.”

Hypocrisy and Faith-Bashing

March 29, 2009

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 one of its scathing attacks on pro-science members of the Texas State Board of Education, the Discovery Institute is accusing board member Geraldine “Tincy” Miller of Dallas of dragging religion into the debate over evolution. The level of hypocrisy in that sneering attack is off the scale:

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.

That’s rubbish.

(more…)

Texas House Speaker Looks at Ed Board

March 28, 2009

Very interesting.

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.

State lawmakers are already considering legislation that would rein in the state board. The Texas Freedom Network is monitoring legislation on the state board and other issues here.

Jerry Coyne on Science and Texas

March 28, 2009

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?

You can read the full essay in the Guardian here.

Science Is Winning in Florida

March 28, 2009

News from Florida:

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.

Florida Citizens for Science has been on the case in that state.

Texas Freedom Network has been following similar legislation in Texas.

McLeroy, Science and ‘Hooey’

March 28, 2009

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.

As with evolution, however, the mainstream scientific community thinks McLeroy’s position is “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.

It Wasn’t All about Evolution

March 27, 2009

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.

The Environmental Defense Fund sent out the following press release:

(more…)

TFN Video: Don McLeroy’s Attack on Evolution

March 27, 2009

“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.”

Science Takes Hit in Texas

March 27, 2009

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.

Live Blogging the Final Science Vote in Texas II

March 27, 2009

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.

Live Blogging the Final Science Vote in Texas

March 27, 2009

A link to the audio of today’s State Board of Education meeting is here.

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.

McLeroy Lets the Cat Out of the Bag

March 26, 2009

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?


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 109 other followers