Religion and non-religion to be excluded from South Carolina classrooms

A new bill has been proposed in Scarolina. Here it is:

TO AMEND ARTICLE 1, CHAPTER 29 OF TITLE 59 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO GENERAL PROVISIONS CONCERNING SUBJECTS OF INSTRUCTION IN THE STATE’S PUBLIC SCHOOLS, BY ADDING SECTION 59-29-15, TO PROVIDE THAT CURRICULUM USED TO TEACH STUDENTS ABOUT THE ORIGINS OF MANKIND MUST MAINTAIN NEUTRALITY BETWEEN RELIGIOUS FAITHS AND BETWEEN RELIGION AND NON-RELIGION, AND TO PROVIDE THAT CURRICULUM THAT DOES NOT MAINTAIN THE REQUIRED NEUTRALITY MUST BE REVISED OR REPLACED AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:

SECTION 1. Article 1, Chapter 29 of Title 59 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

“Section 59-29-15. (A) The General Assembly finds:

(1) that the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution makes wholly applicable to the states the First Amendment’s mandate that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of or prohibiting the free expression of religion;

(2) that the individual freedom of conscience protected by the First Amendment embraces the right to select any religious faith or none at all;

(3) a proper respect for the First Amendment compels the State to pursue a course of neutrality toward religion, favoring neither one religion over other religions, nor religion over non-religion or the inverse;

(4) that atheism is a school of thought that takes a position on religion and the existence and importance of a Supreme Being;

(5) that the United State Supreme Court recognizes atheism as equivalent to a religion for the purposes of the First Amendment; and

(6) that teaching atheism or any of its principals, including, but not limited to, the denial of the existence of a Supreme Being, as a philosophical system of beliefs or in a manner that affirmatively opposes or shows hostility to religion, thus exhibiting a preference for those who believe in no religion over those who hold religious beliefs, violates the First Amendment.

(B) The State Board of Education shall examine all curriculum in use in this State that purports to teach students about the origins of mankind to determine whether the curriculum maintains neutrality toward religion, favoring neither one religion over other religions, nor religion over non-religion, including atheism. Related to non-religion, the examination must include a review as to whether the curriculum contains a sense of affirmatively opposing or showing hostility to religion, thus preferring those who believe in no religion over those who hold religious beliefs. The duty to review curriculum imposed by this section is continuing and must reoccur periodically after the initial review in order to assure compliance with this section.

(C) If the board’s examination determines that any curriculum fails to maintain the neutrality required by subsection (B), the offending curriculum must be revised or replaced as soon as practicable, but no later than the beginning of the next academic year.

(D) This section does not prevent classes being taught pursuant to Section 59-29-230.”

Let’s pare that down to its hard kernel of illogic.

  1. The US government is required to be neutral on religion. Hooray!

  2. Atheism is non-religion, therefore it is a religion. What?

  3. The school curriculum must be reviewed, and anything that teaches religion or non-religion must be revised or replaced.

  4. Oh, by the way, we exempt courses that teach about the Christian Bible from this requirement.

This lovely muddle of confused thinking was composed by Senator Michael Fair, who is a conservative (given) Republican (of course) insurance agent (which makes him qualified to pass laws on education and science, I suppose).

We can also distill the bill down a little further.

Schools can’t teach anything that doesn’t support my sect’s religious views, because that would be a violation of the First Amendment.

(via Sensuous Curmudgeon)

Dis-appointment

In all the news about Obama’s choice of an appointment to the Supreme Court, there’s another possibility looming:

Francis Collins, the geneticist who led the Human Genome Project, is close to taking over the top spot at the National Institutes of Health, according to areport by Bloomberg News.
Collins, who was the director of the NIH’s National Human Genome Research Institute from 1993 to 2008, is in the final stages of being screened by the administration of US President Barack Obama, an unnamed source told Bloomberg.

Elias Zerhouni, Collins’ would-be predecessor, voiced his approval for the pick, telling Bloomberg that Collins has “done things many scientists wish they could do once in their lifetime, and he’s done it repeatedly.”

Collins recently unveiled a new foundation, BioLogos, that promotes “the search for truth in both the natural and spiritual realms, and seeks to harmonize these different perspectives,” according to the organization’s Web site. Collins, who is an evangelical Christian, has said that his new foundation is an attempt to resolve Christian faith with scientific evidence, especially with regard to evolution. In 2006 he published a bestselling book, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, that stirred some controversy in the scientific community.

I didn’t see much “controversy in the scientific community” over that book; I think everyone agreed that he had a perfect right to express his religious views, and there was near-unanimity that they were the views of a gullible fruitbat…an opinion confirmed by his wacky Biologos website. I know he had a good reputation as an administrator of the human genome project, but do we really need to go back to the Bush years of god-walloping goofballs at the head of every major government agency?

There are some objections being raised in the comments that have made me feel like I have to expand on this.

Collins is extremely well qualified for this job. If all we did was look at his CV to see if he’s competent to administer the NIH, I’d say they’d be hard pressed to find a better guy.

I don’t care if the director goes to church. If that’s what he wants to do as a hobby on sunday mornings, no problem.

However, and I think this is a great big HOWEVER, Collins also has a tremendous amount of religious baggage. This is also a political position, and it is fair to look at all the other stuff he brings into the job, and I’m afraid Collins is more than just a guy who goes to church…he’s a religious freak. I’ve read his book, and I’ve browsed his website, and he’s waving a great big hairy ideological flag in addition to his perfectly commendable credentials.

Look at it this way. If we had someone who had an administrative record as good as Collins’, but who was as overtly and proudly atheist as Richard Dawkins, everyone would be doubtful about Obama’s judgment as I am right now — they’d be rightly wondering if this hypothetical candidate would be a diplomatic dead duck…not to mention the right-wingers would be out for his head. Somehow, because Collins happens to be weirdly Christian, we’re supposed to simply overlook the fact that he struts about with his underpants on his head?

Well, Collins is not going to have my confidence, that’s for sure. His writings reveal a man with an extraordinarily poor grasp of scientific reasoning and a surprising lack of understanding of evolutionary biology (his argument that morals could not evolve, for instance, is stunning in its ignorance). I also suspect that he’s going to use this position as a laurel to peddle religious nonsense. I’m assuming he’d have the decency not to do it while he’s in office, but afterwards, it’ll be a stock part of the credentials he will trot out to validate his bogus beliefs, never mind that a large number of the scientists he will be working for think his apologetics are utterly loony.

As you’ve noticed, we’re experiencing technical difficulties

We’re having some major performance problems, as is obvious from all the errors you’re getting when you try to post comments. We had some substantial tweaks made to the code behind the scenes that was supposed to improve performance, but actually had exactly the opposite effect — now Scienceblogs is supposed to be bringing in some expert consultants very soon now to fix the problems, either rolling back the code or figuring out why we aren’t getting any speed boost at all. I don’t know when this will happen, since there are a lot of blogs here, and they all need to be patched somehow. We’re all feeling a bit frustrated by the mess.

Almost always, though, when you post a comment, it is getting added to the database, even if it does bounce back with a timeout error or some other noise. Please don’t just go back and repost the same comment again and again. Go back, reload the page, and see if your comment has appeared first.

Do You Believe In Angels?

The gullibility of the religious is amazing…but they always seem to be rewarded with the fawning affirmations of other believers, and more publishing opportunities. Yet again, the Huffington Post flaunts its absurdl woo side with a piece of tripe from Therese Borchard claiming that angels exist.

As you sit there reading this–whether you believe it or not–there is an angel by your side: it is your guardian angel, and it never leaves you. Each one of us have been given a gift, a shield made from the energy of light. It is a part of the guardian angel’s task to put this shield around us.

To God and the angels we are all equal; we all deserve to be protected, to be cared for, and to be loved, regardless of what others might think of us–good or bad. When I look at someone I can physically see this shield around them; it’s as if it’s alive.

Your guardian angel is the gatekeeper of your body and your soul. He was assigned to you before you were even conceived; as you grew in your mother’s womb he was there with you at every moment, protecting you. Once you were born and as you grow up your guardian angel never leaves your side for an instant; he is with you when you sleep, when you are in the bathroom, all the time–you are never alone. Then, when you die, your guardian angel is there beside you, helping you to pass over.

No, there is no angel next to me. There is no tangible, visible, magical agent here in the same room; I can’t smell it, hear it, feel it, see it, and if I stub my toe there will be no winged seraph to kiss it and make it all better. We could scan this room with all kinds of scientific instruments that can look at wavelengths well outside the limitations of our eyes, and there would be nothing there — I’d be surrounded by a corona of infrared radiation, but in the rest of the room, nothing but a layer of bacteria and nematodes, a cloud of dust mites, and perhaps the occasional housefly.

Yes, I know, if I confronted a fan of belief in angels, they’d tell me my material scientific tools can’t see something spiritual, but then I’d have to point out that their eyes are also merely material tools, and she has claimed to be able to see the ‘shield’ of angels. Is she lying? If we had two angelists viewing this room at the same time, but unable to communicate with each other, they’d give two different accounts of what is going on. They are making it all up.

This whole elaborate mythology of guardian spirits floating about in your vicinity is a lie, and these frauds who claim knowledge of their existence are faking it every step of the way.

But all they have to do is say it confidently, and make sure it’s a pleasing myth, and fools will eat it up.

Eugenie Scott honored again

Now she has been awarded the first ever Stephen Jay Gould Prize from the Society for the Study of Evolution.

The Stephen Jay Gould Prize is awarded annually by the Society for the Study of Evolution to recognize individuals whose sustained and exemplary efforts have advanced public understanding of evolutionary science and its importance in biology, education, and everyday life in the spirit of Stephen Jay Gould.

The winner of the 2009 Stephen Jay Gould Prize is Eugenie C. Scott. Dr. Scott has devoted her life to advancing public understanding of evolution. As the executive director of the National Center for Science Education she has been in the forefront of battles to ensure that public education clearly distinguishes science from non-science and that the principles of evolution are taught in all biology courses. She has served on the boards of many organizations, such as the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study, and as a consultant to organizations from the National Academy of Sciences to WGBH/NOVA to the Mississippi Department of Education. In these efforts, she has been an important leader in the public sphere, molding and focusing the efforts of scientists, educators, lay people, religious groups, skeptics, agnostics, believers, scholars, and ordinary citizens through firm but gentle guidance.

Dr. Scott is a gifted communicator and public intellectual. She is a frequent guest on radio and television shows, and an eloquent spokeswoman for science. Her writings have illuminated the process of science to thousands, and her books have exposed the efforts of many groups in our society to hobble and undermine the teaching of science to our younger generation. The organization she helped create far transcends the considerable reach of her own voice, vastly amplifying her impact on public understanding. For these many reasons, it is extremely appropriate that Dr. Scott be the first recipient of the Gould Prize.

Congratulations!

We’ve been attacked by the stupid, ignorant segment of the culture!

That horrible little Christian parody site, Christwire, is attacking me! It’s terrible! They have publicly made this wicked accusation: “Professor Meyers and the Pharyngula peddle off tentacle anime pornography.” I am aghast. I would sue their slandering, sanctimonious little butts off, except, of course, that their claim is actually true, and I’m actually rather proud of my small role in promoting a universal interest in animal sex.

I’m therefore going to have to fire back directly by linking to them and hammering down their bandwidth. Go ahead, visit their site until you reduce it to a stammering series of 404 errors.

And right after you’ve choked them off, you can read these articles just to spite them.

How to make a vulva

Lobster sex

Worm porn!

Squid nuptial dances

Tentacle sex

Tentacle sex, part deux

Spider Kama Sutra

Sex in the MRI

How to evolve a vulva

Penis evolution

The burden of bearing a massive penis

Fish courtship and sex

Evolution of the mammalian vagina

For shame, California Supreme Court

The California court ruled today on the constitutionality of proposition 8, the measure that prohibited same sex marriage. Unfortunately, the court upheld the ban.

California should be embarrassed. Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Iowa, and Vermont allow or will allow same-sex marriages, and New York and New Hampshire are working on it. The trend is going one way, towards recognizing the civil rights of all individuals. Californians better get to work, you don’t want Mississippi to beat you to the 21st century. (Although I will be quite pleased when Mississippi legalizes gay marriage, whenever that may happen and no matter what order the states accomplish it.)

Gimme my iPod Touch!

While I’m off at meetings, you could be voting to help me win Eric Hovind’s iPod Touch. All you have to do is CLICK ON THIS LINK. Note that it has to be that link — it’s got an imbedded code in it to let the tabulators know that the incoming click comes from me, PZ Myers, so that the Hovind crew will know that they owe me a new toy.

This is the fourth creation minute video, and I think it’s the last one you should have to watch. Sometime after this they’ll tally up all the page views, and somebody will win.

This one, by the way, has Hovind defining science — “knowledge derived from observation and study” — and then giving six uses of the word evolution: cosmic, chemical, stellar, organic, macroevolution, and microevolution. Then he says that only microevolution is scientific. Wow. The cosmologists are going to be surprised that all that physics they’ve been doing is not science; the nuclear chemists are going to learn to their disappointment that all that work on fusion is unobserved and unstudied; the astronomers are going to have to remove the Hertzsprung-Russell diagrams from their textbooks; the biochemists have merely been imagining their work on metabolism and molecular biology; and the paleontologists, biogeographers, systematists, molecular geneticists, and bioinformaticians haven’t been observing and studying anything.

Only the population geneticists get to be called scientists. They’re going to be a bit surprised, too, because as a discipline you’ll be hard-pressed to find a group more unanimous in their support of evolution.

I know, it hurts so bad to be exposed to so much stupid, but it will be worth it when I get to show off my fancy gadget from Creation Science Evangelism. I’m going to especially enjoy all the creationist videos on it, and I hope they even have it engraved or slap a CSE sticker on the back of it.

I hope this isn’t like that Father Ted episode where they were going to lottery off a car, and had arranged ahead of time that Father Dougal would have the winning ticket number of 11. (They almost lost that one because Dougal confused himself by holding his ticket upside down…).

Scientology on trial

The French demonstrate their bravery by putting Scientology on trial:

The case centres on a complaint made in 1998 by a woman who said she was enrolled into Scientology after members approached her in the street and persuaded her to do a personality test.

In the following months, she paid more than €21,000 for books, “purification packs” of vitamins, sauna sessions and an “e-meter” to measure her spiritual progress, she said.

Other complaints then surfaced. The five original plaintiffs – three of whom withdrew after reaching a financial settlement with the Church of Scientology – said they spent up to hundreds of thousands of euros on similar tests and cures.

It’s a promising start, and I wish the lawyers trying to shut down the frauds of scientology good luck.

It’s only a start, though. Scientology is small fry; I think the next target ought to be Lourdes, which also racks up big money for the Catholic church and the various remoras of bunco artists pushing religion with false promises of cures and spiritual purification. I don’t see any difference at all between the papacy and L. Ron Hubbard’s empire of lies…why not hit them all?