Remember Sally Kern, the Oklahoma legislator who loves God and hates homosexuals? She had earlier sponsored something called the Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Act, a ghastly piece of legislation that would require teachers to pass any old crap a student turned in, as long as the student said it was his religious belief — it prioritized belief over evidence. That bill died in a senate committee, fortunately.
But now it has been resurrected! The language from the earlier bill has been inserted into Oklahoma House Bill 2633.
A controversial provision in House Bill 2633 states that “students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions.”
That is simply insane. It’s a declaration that religion trumps everything, and gives students an escape hatch from learning — biology class would become an exercise in futility, in which lazy, stupid, or religiously indoctrinated students would simply parrot the book of genesis at their instructors, and expect to be given a good grade.
Sally Kern knows this.
“We are a very conservative state — a very religious state,” Kern said.
And working hard to become a very stupid state, too.
Oklahomans, be afraid.
i religiously believe that 2+2=5. maybe i should have taken algebra in oklahoma.
And I thought living in Texas was bad… This should scare every Oklahoman, but sadly it won’t.
students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions.I have no problem with that; I will grade it based on the actual content. “No, Johnny, you are not being persecuted; you are simply wrong about the age of the earth. It doesn’t matter why you are wrong, but it matters greatly that you are wrong.”
“Look on the bright side, Johnny; you are failing a class; you are not being sentenced to an eternity of suffering in a lake of fire.”
A temporary discovery of deep religious convictions may be in order to guarantee a good thesis mark then!
Is the teacher then allowed to apply their own religious beliefs to the marking schedule?
Rational people across the south once again sigh that it’s not them being embarrassed by over zealous lawmakers.
(yes I live in SC)
“I truly believe that 2+2=Pineapple-and-ham-pizza, for that is what the IPU desires. It has been privately revealed to me that this is the Truth.”
If this shit goes through, anyone in Oklahoma can write down any kind of bullshit, and eventually get a PhD for it. This is why religion and state must be strictly seperated.
From the Article:
“We are a very conservative state — a very religious state,” Kern said.
Great – why is it that the people we elect to our governmental positions seem to have no grasp of common logic? Kern stated that this legislation would prevent censorship of students by simply doing away with standardized curriculum and grading assignments based o the beliefs of the student. But she did so on the basis of two accounts for which she could prvide no clear examples or proof, and yet such speculation necessitates a law that violates our constitutional establishment clause? I’d think that a little more critical thinking training would have done Mrs. Kern well in her formative years, because this just makes no sense. Either she’s an idiot, or she’s doing it on purpose to allow religion an avenue back into our educational system. I’m inclined to believe the latter.
Either way, I would never want any children of mine within two miles of this woman’s classroom. Especially when she describes her governmental affiliation – her job position and the responsibilities it entails – as an employee of a religious state. How very, very, middle ages of you!
The Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education are hoping to flood the Governor’s office with messages opposing HB 2633:
http://www.biosurvey.ou.edu/oese/
Now that’s a “poll” worth flooding!
“And working hard to become a very stupid state, too.”
Between Kern & Inhofe, state stupidity is a given.
doov
“Kern spoke of an instance when a child was criticized for religion on a school bus, and she said another student got into trouble for the content of a paper. She did not provide specific examples.”
Of course she didn’t provide specific examples, especially for the latter. That would have made it clear that she was blurring the line between science and religion. They want two categories: science-science and religion-science. And both should be given separate-but-equal academic status and respect.
It’s similar to “medicine” and “alternative medicine” (medicine that has either not been tested, or was tested and failed, but we ‘know’ it works because of personal experience.)
The bill is trying to make it sound as if a paper which stated “I am a Christian, so I believe in a 6,000 year old earth — but, according to scientists, the earth is 4.5 billion years old” would be marked wrong. Or that students would be flunked if they were to write “The earth is 4.5 billion years old — Praise the Lord!”
It’s just so hard to be a Christian in our anti-Christian America:
http://www.infidels.org/misc/humor.archive//lioaca.html
At least trigonometry will be a damned site easier…
I believe that 2 + 2 = 5.
YOU MUST PASS ME!
I would love a bill like this to pass in my state. That way, I could just tell my sons to answer every question on every test for every subject with phrases like “God did it” or “God says the answer is three”.
If my kids don’t get straight A’s and a perfect SAT score I’ll sue the state for millions.
>A controversial provision in House Bill 2633 states that “students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions.”< There is good news for scientists in Europe and Asia right there,might as well take the USA off your list of serious science competition right now !!! I just think somehow that Sally Kern would not actually enjoy living in the medieval theocracy she is helping to establish,after all,who would be there to repair her toaster if it broke??
So if the students are allowed to express their beliefs on religion without discrimination, then are they allowed to create artwork along atheist themes? Are they going to permit students who have those views to turn in papers and projects that thoroughly bash religion, or, and this is what I believe will be the case, will this be yet ANOTHER law with the clause “so long as the person admits there is a god”?
This is the type of nonthinking garbage that frees people from having to bother with good manners and forces them into a catch-22 if they are atheists, where they are not included in the protection offered by the law and are opened up to yet more unchecked bigotry by the religious. It’s a sad situation and I’m so fricking sick of laws that permit this kind of unthinking attitude. Other laws are put into place, say things like noise ordinances, because people lack the damn common sense to be civil to each other and have to be FORCED to be polite.
Stupid pandering to children who will gleefully jump all over this to avoid having to put any real effort into schoolwork. I sure would’ve used this to my advantage, knowing the teacher HAD to give me a good grade no matter what nonsense I wrote.
Sastra,
Well, in France, even that wouldn’t be tolerated. The teacher would strike those lines and put a comment in the margins with something like : “you are not asked or permitted to express your religious views”.
The problem in my opinion is that in the USA you have asked for trouble by accepting laws that are far too wishy washy on this issue.
Make it simple : prohibit 100% any exercise, or mention, or recognition of religion or of any form of religious practices in public schools.
This is what we have in France since 1905 (Loi de la Laicité) and it has been working fine. Census after census ahows that this fundamental aspect of our constitution holds firm and is supported by an overwhelming majority of the population, catholics included.
There is no discrimination against religion, a week consists of 168 hours, of which only about 30 are spent in school. That leaves more than 130 hours for parents to endocrinate their children as they wish.
Public schools are for children to learn freely about everything else but religion. It’s simple.
Americans, make things simple. Everything else doesn’t work, religion will keep creeping back in all the time in your schools. This is the only way to control it.
“Make it simple : prohibit 100% any exercise, or mention, or recognition of religion or of any form of religious practices in public schools.”
This would be in violation of the Constitution.
Any such prohibition would be struck down and rightly so.
Students religious views are already protected by the Constitution making the law unnecessary.
This of course does not remove the students obligation to learn and show they understand what they are required to.
@ Neg No 17:
Same in my home country Germnay mate,however I think you need to account for the US american particularities here a bit more,were not dealing with people of reason or rationality,the rationals there are facing a majority of nutters of a variety of denominations,and a government consisting of subscribers of various forms of nutterism ready to torpedo any outbreaks of secular rational thinking any time…..
I really cant imagine what it must be like over there…
“We,” Kemosabe?
I lived in OK for 6 years, voted every chance I got, and not one single candidate I voted for won, at any level from local to national. It was pretty frustrating.
I was happy to escape.
Spurge,
Yes, and you need to ammend that piece of the constitution. For God sake, is this a holy book ? When they wrote this, the founding fathers knew that they were asking for trouble, it’s as if they knew it as they were writing it…
It’s quite obvious that it doesn’t work. Your constitution has a big gaping hole in it on this precise issue. A huge conflict of interest. So what ? Is it more holy than the bible ?
I’m with Spurge. This bill seems superfluous. Aren’t these rights already covered by the Constitution? Hasn’t the ACLU already jumped to the defense of students who were discriminated against for their religious expression? Or is the bill really intended to allow wrong answers to get a religious exemption?
It is worth noting that the language in the bill does not state the instructor must give the student a good grade for his or her religious beliefs. It merely states that the student is free to express those beliefs. If the students are expected to write an essay about how the study of evolution has influnced the medical field, then they can still get a failing grade if they decide to instead write an essay about faith healing.
The only impact this law would have is that if the student put some sort of “I don’t believe in evolution” disclaimer in his essay, that disclaimer would not be factored into the evaluation of the essay as a whole. As long as the essay adequately covered the topic of evolution and medicine, the student should be given a good grade regardless of what he or she believes.
Or what is more likely, what I’ve seen as part of a religious community, is that the law is meant to address the most common complaint parents have about religion being discriminated against in schools. That is, something along the lines of an elementary school class is given an assignment to draw their families engaged in activities (or something similar) and a student includes a religious theme – draws the family going to church with Jesus in the background or something . . . and the teacher refuses to display the picture with the rest of the class’ drawings or otherwise rejects it.
What I find most sad about the law is that someone feels the need to explicitly legislate it. Students already cannot be discriminated against for their religious beliefs (or lack thereof). It’s one of those First Amendment things. Yet there are educators and parents who misunderstand the seperation of church and state, who interpret it as an exclusion of religion from all public forums, and it does happen that students are discriminated against for their religious expressions. Not often, and yes, there are also students discriminated against for their lack of religious belief, which discrimination is also wrong, but it happens. Such cases are generally resolved without going to court and when they do, the courts tend to rule as they should that freedom of expression is protected.
Oklahoma House Bill 2633 is entirely unnecessary. It’s unfortunate that people think it is.
The whole “I believe X, it’s what I’m going to write about and you have to give me a good grade” sounds about right for the shenanigans high school punks would try to pull (coming from someone who taught high school for a short time). That doesn’t mean they’re right. How schoolers are wrong a lot more often than they think they are.
Our future engineers will be building cars with pi = 3.0
You do realize that this is what the Religious wackaloons think we are doing don’t you? They think that their kids are not allowed to pray at all in school, period. This is what you always hear, and it is a total pile of steaming Longhorn bullshit. Kids can pray all they want to in school as long as they do it on their free time. If a child wants to take his lunch break to gather with other religious folks to pray. Then fine. More swing set for me. Just as long the school isn’t setting aside a time for it, promoting it etc. I also think it’s fine to have a comparative religion class as long as that is where it stays and equal time is given throughout the course to the major religions. And that it truly is comparative. I know that opens the door for the fuckwits to proselytize, but as long as there is some form of oversight I say go for it.
The way I read this:
“students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions.”
Students already have this right. You can write in on your biology exam or geology exam that you think the earth is 6000 years old, or whatever, and you will not be discriminated against because of the religious content of your answer, you will be discriminated against because of the incorrect content of your answer, and the discrimination will take the form of being handed a lower grade than would have resulted from a correct answer.
(I feel I have to say that I am using the word “discriminate” to mean simply “recognize the difference”, as I suspect the word carries some baggage.)
Rev: exactly.
Damn dennis N, you beat em to it.
I’m not worried about 2+2=5, but I AM worried about Pi=3. There are tons of websites that try to justify this (its from Kings), presuming we have it wrong and God has it right.
Rev bigdumbchmp, you are right. I also hear often that the atheists want to take away their religion, when in fact, we simply don’t want it shoved down our throats.
Spurge is mostly right. The key issue is NOT that religion is in the schools, its that it is in science class. We teach tons of religious stuff in school, and we should. religion is a very strong part of our history and philosophy. We have a lot to learn from the rights and wrongs of religion.
We just should be teaching biblical stories as fact.
Noboday’s called the cops yet?
Kseniya,
if it’s superflous, why do people oppose it ?
No, it’s because it’s one of the numerous possible interpretations of the exercise clause of the first amendment, just the Sally Kern version of it…
or, to do the whole thing in a French-Canadian accent for consistency:
Nobo-day’s called ze cops yet, eh?
I’m sure this will come back to bite her in the ass when more than Xtians start abusing this law.
I hope not, I’m still working on the full loop.
They have the freedom to write whatever they want, as long as I have the freedom to fail them for it if it is wrong. As most others have noted, they have that right already.
Kern is basking in her new-found fame, playing her notoriety to the hilt (as well as lamenting her martyrdom). The on-line Advocate has a column about it: [Link]
“if it’s superflous, why do people oppose it ?”
Because if it is superfluous the law must be intended to do something beyond the obvious.
This is their whole shtick. Make laws that seem fair but in reality are intended to give their Christian point of view exclusive protection.
I say let ’em pass it. Let every Fred Phelps wannabe spew religious hatred by the gallon. Every smart-ass Pastafarian and Subgenius are also free to insert lengthy sermons into their math homework. Let angry Muslims preach death to the infidel during their oral report on the Middle East. I say bring it on. Make the schools powerless to do anything about it. We’ll see how they like it after a while.
Why don’t all you people with time to post comments about this issue take a few minutes to write Oklahoma’s governor like I did? There’s a link over on ERV’s blog:
Governor Henry,
Please allow a concerned citizen to voice his opposition to a newly-introduced bill in the Oklahoma House of Representatives. House Bill 2633, sponsored (as I understand it) by Representative Sally Kern, says, among other things, “students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions.”
Governor, please let me express my dismay that this subject even needs to be addressed. This is the same Sally Kern who said “(e)volution undermines Christian principles. Period.” This person, in my opinion, is mentally unbalanced.
Permit a non-believer to express a simple FACT: if a particular notion cannot be tested via the scientific method, it is not science and does not belong in a science classroom.
Christian fanatics like Rep. Kern are destroying this country. They seek to undermine REAL freedom in the guise of imposing “morality” on the rest of us who wish to be left in peace. Furthermore, they seek to put American children behind the curve where it comes to science education compared to the rest of the world. And we’re at a severe disadvantage in that area as it is.
Please do what you can to oppose this offensive proposition.
Cordially,
Paul Lundgren
Ames, IA
Man, I wish we had that out when I took physics! Why bother learning anything about gravity when I can claim Intelligent Pushing trumps any laws or formulae. Geometry would have been a breeze. Proof? who needs a stinking proof? All I have to do is quote scripture: “in Him all things are possible.” Count me wrong and I’ll have your frickin’ teacher’s certification for lunch!
This is insane. I go to a Catholic school and I still have to regurgitate the cirriculum from time to time. As far as I know, that’s what being a student is.
I mean, if anyone should be exempt from this, it should be me. After all, at least my ideas make sense and are supported by smart people, like PZ.
Intellient Falling PWNS Intelligent pushing.
Intelligent Falling? Pffft. That’s so 20th century.
The hot theory now is Intelligent Sucking.
And here is the obligatory Calvin and Hobbes reference.
Pardon me for apostasy, but I believe that 2 + 2 = 7½.
Infidels.
not going to go there.. must resist…
And you’re certain these pages aren’t satire? Link?
Rev. BDC @ #33,
Ah, the eternal dream. From Mythbusters:
“It is possible to do a chain-straight 360° loop on a swingset.
busted
Under one’s own power it is impossible to do a chain-straight 360° loop on a school yard swingset. With help of other pushers, it is possible, although highly difficult, to do a full circle without the chain being straight. A person would need a rocket strapped to himself to do it. A dummy was set up in such a manner; the rocket was able to propel it in a chain-straight 360° loop, but the setup would be too dangerous with a real person.”
http://mythbustersresults.com/episode34
@#41
This link, from your link! The Wrathful Dispersion linguistic theory.
Beautiful.
Wrathful Dispersion
Like evidence and experimentation ever stopped anyone.
Guys, I’m really sorry about this. Just know that there are atheists in oklahoma fighting this. Be mad at the legistlature, not the state.
Spurge #36
I don’t understand this. If the exercise clause of the first amendment already protects them, in what sense is this additional piece of legislation intended at giving their Christian point of view exclusive protection ?
Seems to me that religion is already far too much protected in American public schools (my points earlier, even American secularists here seem to disagree but ok, I’m French so I’ll just keep my mouth shut on that one), so this text seems to add absolutely nothing.
I’s just Sally Kern trying to make herself more interesting than she is. This is just much ado about nothing, or am I completely missing something ?
Rev. BDC @ #49,
Call it the Theology of the Loop and you’re halfway to the OK State Science Fair!
Fuck man…wtf.
Has there ever been a nation so bent upon a course to self-destruction as the US seems to be?
Maybe the Birchers were right about floridation in our water being a commie plot to destroy the US. It just took 40 years longer than they thought.
I’m proud to live in the relatively progressive state of Tennessee. Perhaps we learned our lesson with Scopes?
I’m proud to live in the relatively progressive state of Tennessee. Perhaps we learned our lesson with Scopes?
Posted by: Greg Esre
Then please do explain Bill Frist.
Because people, a lot of people, misunderstand the First Amendment. They misunderstand what the seperation of church and state means based on the first amendment. There are anti-religious crusaders who mistakenly try to use the seperation of church and state to exclude religion from public. There are religious crusaders who mistakenly believe the seperation means they are excluded. There are people caught in the middle who really couldn’t care less, but mistakenly believe that if they don’t exclude religion from their classrooms they might lose their jobs.
Really, the law is uneccessary . . . but a lot of people mistakenly believe we need it. I would sincerely hope that a legislator would not be among those people, but legislators are elected from the general populace and are subject to all our flaws. That and, unfortunately, religion sells very well in US politics. It may well be that any given legislator realizes the law is uneccessary, but will support it to pander to a cerain subset of his or her constituancy.
“students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions.”
This says nothing about answering a question correctly. Answering “god” to answer the question “without [_____] photosynthesis cannot occur” would be just as worthy of an F as “2+2=5” or stating the value of Pi as 3.
But, those aren’t really the kind of questions contemplated, now are they?
We are afraid PZ and we are doing everything we can to get the bill vetoed. BTW it’s the squeeky wheel that gets the grease and Kearn squeeks alot. What she needs is a good blowjob to change her perspective but I’m not volunteering.
Correct.
I can see it now…
Teacher: Welcome to class children, this will not take long. Any question you come across the answer is ‘God did it’. This applies to any question you may have. That’s all, see you next year.
School just got a lot easier.
CL
http://www.coulerlewkowitz.com
My understanding is that all this Kern legislation mimics similar legislation that has been in effect in Texas for a long time. Yet none of you are bombarding the Texas legislature with emails. For an “intelligent” group of people, you are all reacting much like your opponents. “We all know ….” this legislation will lead to teachers being forced to accept 3.0 as PI whenever the student declares a religious revelation has revealed him/her/it the truth. Actually, there is no such statement made.
says nothing about grading at all and is redundant except for those anal-retentive teachers and administrators who fear allowing a child to express its religious beliefs in any of the above forms. As mentioned by commenter Jack, this would include a picture of the child’s family at church or an essay about bible camp returned to an assignment on “What I did last summer.” There is nothing in this language that says the child has the right to determine the truth of test answers anymore than he/she/it has ever had.
A tempest in a teapot I think this is, formed more by what this woman stands for than what the legislation actually says.
The problem is, of course, that these religious nuts are told constantly by their pastors, christian media, etc., that they *are* being unfairly persecuted… And that the Bible *is* completely and utterly irrefutably “true”.
Point out that most Christian scientists worldwide have no problem with evolution (and most Christians in Europe, and the Catholic Church for that matter…) and you’ll be told that these people aren’t *real* Christians.
It’s a ghastly state of affairs.
Hey ho.
We need to stop framing this debate as Christians vs. Atheists, and start framing it as rational people vs. religious nuts.
Yours, atheistically, PTET.
“Guys, I’m really sorry about this. Just know that there are atheists in oklahoma fighting this. Be mad at the legistlature, not the state.”
I second that, I just sent a second letter to Gov. Henry asking him to veto the bill.
All you with your 2+2+5 stuff. Hah! Testing itself, is against my religious beliefs. I don’t even have to fill in the answers! In fact, having to go to school is against my beliefs. Oh, and paying taxes, and respecting other’s rights as humans, and…
I don’t think that specific reframing either helps or addresses the issue.
It does not help.
The division is too stringent. I believe in God and I recognize that is not rational. I don’t think spiritual experience needs to be rational. I “believe in” evolution and the scientific method. I don’t know how to reconcile the apparent contradictions. But I both know what experiences I’ve had and I think critically about what I’m taught. By your classification, am I a religious nut or a rational person?
It does not address this issue.
One part of the issue being freedom of expression. Yes, even our school children have that right. Another part being the mistaken sense of repression felt by religious persons in the USA and how politicians take advantage of it. It is shameful that Ms. Kerns has proposed this legislation. Not because “Oh no! Religious nut jobs are taking over the state!” But because it illustrates how ignorant people are about the relation between church and state. Ms. Kern is right about one thing. Oklahoma is a very religious state. The whole country is. Religious people have already taken over the state. If anything is “nuts”, it’s that this group somehow feels repressed when they’re the ones in charge.
or, er . . . the word I mean to use is oppressed. I think I understand why they/we feel repressed.
Everyone, be sure to donate to Kern’s opponent, Ron Martlett, to get this nut out of the state house. I no longer live in Oklahoma City, but I have family that do, and crap like this makes the whole state look stupid.
As an atheist, I can see how kids could have some fun with this idea….but it doesn’t justify its seeing the light of day.
Kern(el) should get together with Paul ‘Horst’ Wesselhoft – he’s completely paranoid too and way past his sell-by date. He keeps trying to ban ‘pit bulls’ even though nobody supports his wacky Bills (they invariably die in the House)and OK State law prohibits that kind of crazy stuff.
Oklahoma is a ‘very religious state’, eh? Good thing it’s also a sparsely populated one.
@oldfart
Yes, the RVAA legislation is already the law of the land in Texas; it passed in the 2007 session.
It blows.
@ Oldfart
“says nothing about grading at all and is redundant except for those anal-retentive teachers and administrators who fear allowing a child to express its religious beliefs in any of the above forms.”
This is exactly where it is redundant.
Students are already protected by the Constitution in those cases.
This country is going to hell. Or at least Oklahoma! is. I thought I might put the exclamation point after Oklahoma because I thought it might be clever.
Expression of religious views in science classes or math class would be simply superfluous as long as the student eventually got down to the content expected to be addressed. For most tests or worksheets there would be little room or time to include elaborate religious opinions. However, a student assigned a three-page paper (assuming their attention spans permit them to do something like this in OK) who spends two and a half pages expounding biblical crap may be difficult to protect against. The assignment would have to be carefully worded.
Too many comments to read them all, so apologies if this was already mentioned:
Brayton’s blog covered a case recently in which a Christian student’s art assignment was rejected because it included a cross. Seemed to be a case of a clueless teacher not understanding just where the boundary lazy. Someone (don’t recall if it was the ACLU or the ADF) set them straight that the student’s submission was perfectly permissible. End of story.
So Kern’s bill seems to protect things that are already protected (artistic expression, where there is no objective “truth”), but also allows for applicability creep into the scientific area.
As a past resident of Oklahoma I both called and wrote to the Governor’s office. Here is what I said (actually I fibbed a bit, I am so sick of religious zealotry that I don’t really think there is any place for it):
Honorable Governor Henry:
I spent the first 47 of my 58 years in Oklahoma. Although I no longer reside there, I attribute my successful scientific career to a number of excellent teachers I had in Oklahoma, from grammar school through my degrees at OU. I am a Senior Project Scientist, currently working for a private company. Previously I worked in an EPA research laboratory and have also served as an External Advisor to the Los Alamos National Laboratory.
None of this would have been possible without the unbiased, factual, evidence and reason-based education that I received in Oklahoma. The amendment proposed by Rep. Kerns to HB 2633 threatens to derail such science education in the state that I love, the state of my birth, the state that gave me the tools to succeed in life.
There is a place for religion and there is a place for science, but the place for religion is not in the classroom. It is the height of folly to provide students with a tool that will allow them to challenge the understanding and teaching of science with religious viewpoints for which there is no evidence. In fact, in the absence of such evidence, it is quite literally possible for virtually any sort of nonsense to be promulgated by the students in the classroom in the name of religion.
I strongly urge you to support the continued education of the children of our great state and foster continued scientific and economic growth in Oklahoma by vetoing this anti-science and anti-reason bill.
Or paraphrased, “You may zink vatever you vant, but not on state time!”
I’m sorry . . . I mean, I do agree that this is a stupid bill. It’s just . . . I dunno’. I can’t excuse myself. It just struck me as funny. The bill is not anti-science or anti-reason. Kern may be, but the bill is not. It’s just unnecessary.
The problem is that if there is any kind of a nutter loophole, they will exploit it. Plus, teachers shouldn’t have to wade through a bunch of extra religious verbosity while grading papers or tests. It is irrelevant and the teachers should be allowed to criticize the insertion of such nonsense without fear of retribution.
As faculty at the University of Oklahoma, I would like to comment. First, this amendment has almost no chance of becoming law. Governor Henry is an intelligent individual and pro-education; he will certainly veto it. I and numerous others have written to him to voice opposition to this bill. Second, I would like to point out the link to the Zoology Department just to give a little different view of our state and science:
http://www.ou.edu/cas/zoology/evolution.htm
At least we don’t need the following statement:
http://www.lehigh.edu/~inbios/news/evolution.htm
From the southern plains…
My six years in Stillwater! were as close to the mythical “hell” as I ever hope to get.
There are people who would exploit it, sure. Unfortunately, that’s human nature. But there is nothing in this bill that doesn’t already exist . . . that they could not already exploit.
Keep in mind, I’m not advocating support for this bill. I don’t think there’s any harm in it, other than that its passage might be seen as a victory by unsavory political types, but as I said, I think it’s a stupid, unnecessary bill. Mostly, I’m just pushing the debate where I think I see some fallacies.
Which leads me to ask what you are suggesting? Do you mean to say that teachers should be allowed to discriminate against students based on religious expression? That because there do exist unscrupulous “religious” persons, the thought police should clamp down on students’ expressions of religion?
Yes. We have written off Texas as a national sacrifice area. Rumor has it the Texas bill is already causing problems. Specifically that the creo wingnuts are pushing creationism into our kid’s science classes.
Although from what I’ve heard, they didn’t need the bill to do that anyway.
You know what, I’m going to shut up now. I’m sorry. I’m new here. I found a link to the site and it’s fascinating. The scientific content is interesting, I agree with a lot of the politics. I even agree with much of the anti-religious zeal, despite being a religious person myself, because I think a lot of the religious community . . . um, . . . invites criticism.
Like I say, I’m new here. Poking around the site, I came across the Dungeon and want to just bow out before I get banned for “concern trolling”. I mean, that’s not my intent. It’s just the level of anti-religious zealotry over something of relative unimportance got to me.
Sorry. I’ll just read along.
Jack, if I said anything that gave the impression that teachers should be allowed to religiously discriminate, it was not my intent. I don’t think their homework or test papers are appropriate places for them to exhibit their religious beliefs, however. Not in a science course anyway, perhaps in a philosophy class.
Sucks being gay AND living in this state. It’s no surprise though, there have been many proposed stupidities that originate in Oklahoma’s House.
Oklahoma is no worse than many states in regsrd to anti-evolution bills. In fact, since 1999 every attempt each year (except one year where none were introduced) at placing creationism in any form into public schools has been defeated. There have been as many as four such bills in a given year, several by Silly Sally Kern. There were five such bad bills this year; only Kern’s made it through. In 1999 the State Textbook Committee, having been stacked by appointment of a group of fundamentalists by a Republican governor, required textbook disclaimers. The Attorney General ruled that they had acted improperly and the disclamers were gone. OESE has been a leader in fighting legislative pro-creation attempts since 2000.
As long as the Democrats controlled the Legislature, especially the Senate, such bills were killed, although in one year a bill was defeated by only one vote. Now that the Republicans control the House and the Senate is split 50-50, it has become difficult to stop lots of bad bills. The Republicans almost always vote in lock step for religious motivated crap and many DINOs (Democrats in Name Only) join them as they troll for imagined (?) votes from the religious right.
HB 2633 that passed this year had apparently ‘died’ twice during the legislative process. The Senate leadership assigned HB 2211 (the original Kern bill)to the Rules Committee where it was not heard. Then on the floor of the Senate HB 2633 was amended to add most of the language of HB 2211. A motion by the Democrats to advance the bill without the Kern amendment failed on a tie vote of 24-24. Lt. Gov. Jeri Askins could have broken the tie, but she was not called to do so – why? – apparently for political reasons; they did not want her to have to cast a vote on a controversial bill in the likely event she becomes a candidate for governor in the next election! Such are the ways of provincial politics!
Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education (OESE) has fought these bills hard all year and are now mounting a successful drive to get messages to the Governor to veto. Many individuals have responded (best to have Oklahomans do this rather than ‘outsiders’ for obvious reasons, perhaps).
State and national organizations that have issued press releases/statements opposed to the Kern Krap include: OESE, Oklahoma Academy of Science, Oklahoma Science Teachers Association, Oklahoma Mainstream Baptists, Oklahoma and national offices of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Oklahoma City and Tulsa Interfaith Alliances, Oklahoma State Schools Board Association, American Institute of Biological Sciences, National Association of Biology Teachers, and others. All have recently sent hard copies of their statements to the Governor’s Office.
Reference was made above to the OU Zoology statement on evolution – one of the better ones I have seen. In fact there are several institutions and organizations in Oklahoma with strong pro-evolution statements; these are linked on the OESE website (http://www.biosurvey.ou.edu/oese/), along with items on the history of the anti-creation battles in Oklahoma.
OESE also operates annual workshops for teachers on the teaching of evolution.
Also, let’s not forget that a bill almost identical to Kern’s is now LAW in Texas, where it has resulted in legal problems for school districts. No state is immune to creationist actions. Indeed, Florida, Louisiana, Missouri, and others now have legislatuive attempts and creationism’s ugly head arises at the local level in many other states. So, be prepared whenever you reside to combat the attempts that are likely to continue.
#78
Prof. McShan, thank you for that insight, that’s very encouraging.
And yes, UO doesn’t have the same “issue” as Lehigh, or the University of Idaho:
http://www.president.uidaho.edu/default.aspx?pid=85947
#85
Thankfully, the Florida bill died in legislature. But yes, the others are still in play. Keep fighting the good fight in Oklahoma!
This thing really pisses me off.
It doesn’t piss me off because of Sally Kern, I mean, the poor girl, she’s just… severely brain damaged. She can’t help it.
No, it pisses me off because of the reaction of American secularists. Sorry, but can’t they see that the religious right is just playing games with them ? This is just one more of those illusory battle grounds.
I mean look at this proposed legislation. Who in his sane mind really believes that thing would change anything ? Would wingnuts be more protected than they already are with this legislation ? Give me a break.
So secularists are demanding this piece of dreck be stopped, politicians are going to debate, and in the end what ? If they give up, what will they have won ? Nothing. Meanwhile, religion keeps creeping in everywhere.
No, what secularists should be doing is to reply with an opposite piece of legislation, one which prohibits the recognition of religions in public schools. This does not mean that one prohibits the free expression thereof, but it means that no teacher recognizes any religion and makes it clear that the relgious views of students will not be recognized in any way.
As long as secularists keep fighting for these illusory debates, there will remain the current status quo. And we know what this means. There was supposed to be separation of church and state so that the state can keep religion out of public affairs, but instead, it’s been creeping back in time over time and now impregnates every aspect of government and political life in America.
So get this legislation out, but at least, ask for something in exchange !
‘parasitic indoctrination’
analogy time…
proponents of this plan are toxoplasmosa gondii
they want children to be rats
their flavor of religion is the cat
i sent my letter to the gov’ner and becoming rather nauseous from reading the comments below the article linked-to by pz
You have to know fundie Death Cultist doublespeak.
Darwinist=atheistic mass murderers
Satanist=Scientist
Devil Worshiper=Scientist
Teach the controversy=let’s sneak creationism into HS science classes even though it is illegal
Viewpoint discrimination=those mean devil worshippers won’t accept our mythology as equal to what the Hubble Space Telescope finds.
Academic Freedom Bill=Let’s try to sneak creationism into the kid’s science classes again even though it is illegal.
Religious Freedom Bill=Let’s try to sneak creationism into the kid’s science classes again. When we get caught we will scream “Viewpoint Discrimination, Religious Discrimination, Controversy Discrimination, and academic freedom.” Then we will call them atheistic satanic mass murderers and make a movie called Expelled the Sequel, Persecution.
Fundies love doublespeak. They like sponsoring vaguely worded bills that can be interpreted as giving them carte blanche to violate the US constitution and sneak creo mythology into our kid’s science classes.
There is nothing benign about Orwellian doublespeaking, Death Cultists who wish to destroy the US, set up a theocracy, and head on back to the dark ages. Their close cousins own the middle east and look what they have done to those societies.
@#88 mycroft —
And of course, I just had to look…
I particularly liked this one (comment #17 on the article):
I live in Oklahoma and I can tell you she SCARES me.
Luckily I am moving to Portland, OR as soon as I can.
Etha,
That one caught my eye too. He must be a real hoot around the dinner table when he gets going. Sure not the type of good-old-boy I’d want to have a beer with.
It makes me wonder what sort of brain activity allows one to regurgitate such bronze-age, peasant-controlling drivel and think they are making a valid argument while having no cognizance that they are being duped, just like that peasant a few thousand years ago.
Most Americans (and, from what I’ve seen, nearly everyone outside the U.S.) misunderstand the dual aspect of the Constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion. First there is the establishment clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits government entities from participating in religious activities. The establishment clause was intended to end the practice of establishing official state religions. Second, the free exercise clause prohibits the government from restricting the religious practices of individuals. The historical root of the free exercise clause is the oppression of religious minorities by theocratic governments in Europe and, later, in the American colonies.
The establishment clause has resulted in the banning of official prayer from public schools. Some school officials (and some teachers) have incorrectly interpreted the ban to mean that students may never express religious viewpoints in school. It’s a tough call sometimes–for example, can school facilities be used for a Bible study group on the students’ own time, on a par with other extracurricular interest groups? Does it make a difference whether the Bible study group incurs additional costs for the school, which could be unlawful public funding of religion? Lawyers and judges have (literally) written tomes on the tension between the two freedom of religion clauses in the First Amendment.
Viewed generously, Sally Kern’s legislation might be viewed as an attempt to clarify the line between the two clauses. That is, the free exercise proscription on school prayer should not be overextended into a proscription of students’ private religious expression. However, I’m not inclined to view Ms. Kern’s legislation generously, given the political context. It’s much more likely (may I say “certainly”?) a thinly vieled attempt to sneak Creationism back into science class, with a fallback position that allows her to claim oppression by Big Science if her attempt fails. For her, it’s a political win-win. Sadly.
Seek out a DVD called “Serious Organised Criminal” by the English comedian Mark Thomas. It has nothing whatsoever to do with science or religion, but is a very very good example of how one can protest a stupid law by following it to the very letter. And it’s trouser-wettingly funny!
With this particular stupidity, I would recommend that teachers do pass students who put religion into their science papers, even when they’re completely wrong. Just give them the lowest possible grade that’s still technically a pass. Then you’d still be obeying the law, right?
Well, if the teachers are forced to pass any old thing, then they ought to add a new scoring system to the one they already have.
All work will receive two grades, one for merit in whatever technical aspects the assignment was for, and one for religion, and of course, everyone will always get an ‘a’, so negating the effect of the grade overall, and it’s a wash.
Problem solved.
Maybe I’m missing something here, but I don’t see what’s so bad about this. I would want to replace “religion” with “anything”, but either way it just says discrimination isn’t allowed. To me that means if the assignment is about evolution and the student talks about religion, they flunk, no matter what the religion…no discrimination, you don’t do the assignment, you flunk.
π =3 according to the bible. Perhaps students should begin applying this rule in mathematics? It would be fascinating to see what would result. I can’t be surprised that a piece of legislation like this has popped up in the States, I’m only sad that this kind of legislation pops up in the country to the South of where I live.
Dave @ #96:
Viewed neutrally, the proposed legislation could be interpreted as you understand it–the student could say whatever about religion but would still be required to get the course content right. In the context of time and place, however, it probably would be used as an excuse either to give students a pass for substituting Creationism for real biology, or to sue schools that fail to give such a pass.
Thom @ #97:
What I don’t get is the lack of imagination in asking pi to be 3. After all, 3 is an annoying small prime number that’s hard to work with. Math would be much easier if pi was a nice highly divisible number like 12 or 24. Could someone please let Ms. Kern know?
I wonder what havok claiming to believe in the FSM would cause in a cooking class.
“But pasta and meatballs are sacred!”
As for pi, I really get annoyed by it. It bugs me to work with it, both pi and the square root of 2. My husband has a thing for pi and tells me that I’m being irrational. ;^)
I’m not worried about 2+2=5, but I AM worried about Pi=3. There are tons of websites that try to justify this (its from Kings), presuming we have it wrong and God has it right.
Posted by: techskeptic | May 13, 2008 9:32 AM
Pi is not in the bible. 1 Kings 7:23-24
If it gets passed, 5 bucks says some smartass says that in his religion, 42 is the answer to all questions.
#2 If you live in TX, you already have this bill as a state law!
http://www.texscience.org/religion/hb3678-commentary.htm
I knew one elementary school teacher who assigned drawing projects around Christmas time. “Draw something you think about while we are on school break for two weeks.”
Santa Claus
Presents
Snow (not that we have whatever that is in our part of California)
Mary, Jesus, Wise men, shepherds etc
Other
The teacher segregated artwork into categories and put them up in her classroom.
There was no outcry.
The teacher was a fine Christian woman. But she used her classroom for teaching reading, writing and arithmetic. She did not teach that Jesus is the Son of God. She did not teach that God had His hand in creation. She did not teach salvation by faith. At least not in a public school classroom.
This is how it should be.
Oklahoma, for all the hard work done in the pursuit of idiocy in Florida, Kansas, Texas and Alabama, still stands in quiet confidUnce as the dumbest state of our union (with of course apologies to the many good, intelligent people who live or have relatives there).
OK’s Senator Inhofe is the ugliest (inside – well, outside as well, really) AND dumbest politician in the nation today, and the supporting cast of ignorant and evil in OK’s state and national politics appears unrivalled.
(I’ll be glad to hear infomation that modifies these harsh views – I only go by what comes my way and do not keep regular tabs on any local news sites in the state.)
I object to you calling Oklahoma dumb, Sioux. Some of the smartest and best-educated people I’ve known in my life were in Oklahoma. I was made aware of and was taught genetics and evolution in my senior year of high school during an advanced biology class in Okmulgee, OK, in 1968. I think that was really amazing for the time and place. It was that high school teacher, more than anyone else, who put me on to a career in science.
Oklahoma is merely suffering from the same kind of religious nutjobbery as much of the rest of the country; the zealots have just focused so far on school districts/states with large religious percentages and where education has not fully permeated the rural countryside. Trust me, they are trying to find a foothold wherever you are as well.
I agree with you though, Inhofe both sucks and blows simultaneously and is certainly not averse to taking advantage of those who are enamored of all the religious nonsense.
Sioux: Please read #85. Yes, Oklahoma has perhaps the worst Congressional delegation, but we also have an excellent Democratic Governor and Lt.Governor. It is not All negative. We can at least point to a few other states that are worse. Be careful, you too may well suffer the inroads of creationism no matter where you reside. Just check the NCSE web site for all of the places that creationism has arisen, even recently at the local level in Maine.
Those states with a large % of fundamentalists are most often the target, but that does not mean that all citizens in such states agree with the religious zealots; no state is free of them, just look around! Be prepared to oppose such stuff in your own area – it may well come.
…And when the Earth had cooled and water formed on the surface, The Goddess descended. She wept at the sight of desolate Earth. Her tears became protozoa, and she said ‘Blessed be you and evolve.’
Think that would pull down an A?
LOVE. THIS. POST.
I will do everything I can to avoid Oklahoma! ;-)
Oklahoma! Oklahoma! Oklahoma!
#198 Chris: Have you forgotten the awful battle over teaching standards in Ohio (assuming that the Columbus you mention is in Ohio;there are quite a few towns named ‘Columbus’). The good guys finally won, but Ohio received a lot of publicity, not all of it respectful! Yes, Ohio has a somewhat better Congressional delegation than Oklahoma (who doesn’t?), but has certainly not been immune to creationism or other problems – like most states.
Sorry, I meant # 109.
I have to wonder, would someone who gets failed for turning in religious work be able to make the claim that they were discriminated against because the material they were graded against is just what the teacher believes to be the correct answers or something to the same effect? I see a lot of possibility for the wording of this to be used in attempts like this. The success or failure of such attempts remains to be seen, but the wording opens it up to this possible abuse as I read it.
Anyone else think this would be possible from the wording or think that a creationist wouldn’t care and would try it anyway?
On the face of it, it seems ridiculous to make an ‘exception’ for religion. However, it’s just smoke and mirrors. All they’ve done is written a redundant Freedom of Speech statement into a bill. They couldn’t be more specific without risking having it immediately thrown out.
Even if passed it will still not provide an exception, because they would need to prove they had been discriminated against. To do this they would have to show that other students with equivalent work (under the marking key) who did not include religious content got marks that were better by a statistically significant amount. If this came to court, the cases that would be won would be those where the student wrote a religious belief that was inconsequential to their full answer, or where they were asked to write an opinion and referenced the religious roots. Being marked wrong for writing “Jesus is my personal saviour” after correctly answering a geometry question is kind of illegal already.
That’s how it should work,but there will be a whole set of cases where they try to argue that religious content exempts the submitted work from factual requirements placed on other students… and will lose them all.
Funny, the motivations are always the opposite of their stated goal. Anti-discrimination legislation is actually to create discrimination, fostering debate is actually to suppress debate… like a constant stream of doublethink.
AN ANALYSIS OF WHY SALLY KERN’S ‘RELIGIOUS VIEWPOINTS ANTIDISCRINMINATION ACT’ AS AN AMENDMENT TO HB 2633
IS VERY BAD FOR OKLAHOMA AND WHY PARTS MAY BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL
1. It takes away local control from a school board in some instances.
2. It contains mandates that will cost money. There are requirements of printing and hours for policy development by local school districts. But more importantly, it REQUIRES that the Oklahoma Attorney General defend any lawsuits against a school/school board, thus placing the financial burden on State taxpayers and perhaps burdening the Office of the Attorney General that has more important legal matters to consider.
3. The requirement that the Attorney General to defend any law suits was designed to encourage schools/school boards to experiment with allowing some religious activities that may be unconstitutional, since they would face no financial burdens.
4. The bill creates a Limited Public Forum requiring strict scrutiny of Freedom of Speech as ruled by the Supreme Court in Hazelwood School District v Kuhkmer, 1988, yet this bill limits who can have this free speech. In so doing, there can exist a violation of the 14th Amendment’s equal treatment under the law clause. If the school house is a Closed Forum, then speech can be censored as described by several Supreme Court cases. However, when a Limited Forum is allowed, speech cannot be censored regardless of the content. While this bill opens the door for religious speech, this would also have to include radical Islamic speech, Ku Klux Klan speech, or other speech that could call for the overthrow of the US government or the like.
5. This Limited Public Forum is opened up for such activities as football games in which the Supreme Court has ruled against prayer over a PA system that was established by district policy and policy that dictated whether a prayer would be given and a process to elect the prayer in Santa Fe v Does, 2000. HB 2633 establishes a procedure that determines who could give religious speech and when it could be given. In effect, it allows a student to make a football game, athletic contest, a school assembly, opening exercise at school into a religious or solemn occasion at the whim of a student and make all those in attendance captive to this particular speech or event – regardless of the language used as long as it is not “obscene, vulgar, offensively lewd, or indecent speech or speech promoting illegal drug use.” It could be offensively religious or promote the over throw of the US or many other areas that would be offensive to all sorts of people. It is not limited to ‘Christian’ beliefs, although the authors intended
the bill to support ‘Christian’ activities only.
6. Part of what this bill does is create its own version of the Equal Access Act, 1984 which withstood a Supreme Court challenge, Board of Ed of Westside Community School v Mergens, 1990.
7. In Wallace v Jaffey, 1985, the Supreme Court ruled the Alabama law for a moment of silence to start the school day was unconstitutional because it had been modified with the only intent of encouraging prayer. The moment of silence was okay, but for the state to coerce people (students) to pray was wrong. It was to be absolutely voluntary. This bill’s intent seems to be to inject religious activities into the school at the whim of a student.
8. No court has ever ruled against voluntary private prayer. But this bill will allow religious activities to be forced on other people at events that should be inclusive for everyone. Only the most popular or brightest will be allowed to participate “as the school district may designate.” (Line 21, page 6 of the original HB 2211 bill.)
This proposed bill is very bad public policy. It is full of Constitutional questions. It provides for complete Freedom of Speech on one hand, but only for a few people. It is censorship for the masses and does not treat everyone with equality. Why must a person born with lesser mental, athletic, or social skills be subjected to the possible religious thoughts and rituals of others with no recourse to practice their brand of religion? Freedom of religion means that everyone can practice their beliefs regardless of their station in life. What is worse, this is a state directive to establish a process whereby one citizen is allowed to do this to another citizen. This is the state being excessively entangled in a religious ceremony. Students can “witness” to other students anytime they want as long as they don’t interfere with the educational process. And, the student who is being “witnessed” to has the freedom to get up and leave or to tell the person to go away!! Or stop what they don’t want to hear what they have to say. In this bill, that option is not there. The other students become a captive audience to the speaker.
10. Rep. Kern stated in the House debate that the bill would save money and prevent lawsuits. An almost identical bill in Texas that is now law has already resulted in lawsuits in at least two school districts. In opposing the Texas legislation the Dallas Morning News editorialized ‘Watch the Lawsuits Come Rolling in.”
11. Some attorneys for school boards in Texas have told their clients that they could not provide legal advice on how to put the policies into effect, but could only respond with advice on a given particular case. This is a result of the stealth and ambiguous language in the law.
12. Analyses of the constitutional and other problems with the almost identical Texas law are also available from organizations that fought the bill there, including the Texas Freedom Network, Texas Academy of Science, and Texas Citizens for Science. Many Texas educators, scientists and clergy members opposed the bill there.
13. About half of the language in HB 2633 only codifies what is already provided by former Supreme Court decisions. Students can pray in school, form religious clubs like any other student organizations, can meet at recess or before and after school at the flagpole for prayer, etc. There is absolutely no need for this part of the bill. Schools are already well aware of what is constitutional and what is not. Schools have policies in place that deal with students and their freedoms of religious expression. If a school becomes in violation of the federal law and case law, they can be sued and will lose if they are indeed not allowing a student to exercise their religious freedom. This law is not needed nor is it wanted. It will cause more harm than good.
14. Although the bill does not directly mention evolution, one major aim is to dilute science teaching. This has been made clear by statements of Oklahoma and Texas legislators in e-mails written in answer to voters who wrote in opposition to the bill (some of these e-mails are available and might be useful in a court case?). This is a reason that creationist and intelligent design proponents nationally have supported the legislation.
15. The economic impact should be considered. HB 2633 would not help Oklahoma recruit scientists, educators at all levels, and the high tech/med tech industry the State desires. The Governor of Kansas emphasized this important aspect when Kansas was dealing with the religious decisions of the Kansas State School Board, now reversed since the fundamentalist members lost their control in an election.
16. The following State and National organizations have prepared press releases and statements of why HB 2633 is bad for both religion and science and why it would reflect badly upon Oklahoma. These are available upon request:
Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education
Oklahoma Academy of Science
Oklahoma Science Teachers Association
Oklahoma Mainstream Baptists
Oklahoma City Interfaith Alliance
Tulsa Interfaith Alliance
National office of Americans United for Separation of Church and State
Oklahoma Chapter, Americans United for Separation of Church and State
American Association for the Advancement of Science
The Oklahoma State Schools Board also opposed the bill according to quotes in the printed media. The State Capitol coalition of education organizations/lobbyists also opposed the bill.
———————-
Prepared by vhutchison on 13 May 2008, with assistance from many others, for use by Oklahoma Democratic Senators ansd some state officials opposed to HB 2633.
NOTE: This bill originated in Texas where it is now the law. Other states should be prepared for this to appear there. It is likely to spread justas the ‘Academic Freedom Act’ bills have done in several states this year.
The American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) should be added to the list above. AIBS sent the Governor an excellent letter of why he should veto HB 2633.
I’m sure someone already said this, but my big fear over this thing getting passed is the idea that teachers will be walked on even more than before. The “‘God did it’ is the new answer to all questions; see you next year” joke above hit this home for me.
Where does it end? When a third grade teacher is going to end up too scared to grade a student’s work correctly for fear that his family will drop a lawsuit on her — when the student is just being lazy — are any of these crazy wingnuts going to understand how low this is?
My big hope is that more rationally-thinking students will have the guts to follow suit by answering with FSM and IPU answers. I would like to daydream that that sort of activism will force the educators to get good and furious. I think it’s easy to shake your head when it’s just one side doing it, but if everyone else plays along, it ought to really bring the nuttiness into perspective.
When suddenly no one is actually learning anything, the school boards will have a collective panic attack, and something will have to be done. And Sally Kern’s fifteen minutes of fame will be definitively up (though it seems many are arguing that they were up quite a while ago).