Teach The Controversy

DI’s position on Ohio’s “Critical Analysis of Evolution” model lesson plan was created to implement a benchmark in the Ohio state science standards which requires students to be able to “describe how scientists continue to investigate and critically analyze aspects of evolutionary theory.” The standards also clearly state that they do not endorse teaching intelligent design.

At a time when critical thought and dissent are under attack and a chilling atmosphere looms over academia. Should we not continue encouraging students to think critically? The nature of DI’s statement is to put out controversial ideas and let the students respond, to teach them to think critically.

So what is wrong with that? Well, it is hypocritical. Yes! It is absolutely and completely hypocritical by Darwinian promoters to attack DI’s stance. You see, the first paragraph was a quote from the DI website, but he second paragraph are statements lifted from left wing liberal media outlets, Jay Bennish and an ACLU lawyer. They made these statements in defense of Jay Bennish’s tirade on President Bush and the U.S. government. His unbalanced diatribe and deviation from the subject of geography was defended by these likely Darwin defenders as justify, because it teach students to think critically. It claims that ” critical thought and dissent” are under attack. Why didn’t these people come to the defense of ID when all we want to do is to teach the students to think critically of evolution? Why are the Darwinian blogs so silent on chastising Jay Bennish for proselytizing his political and philosophical ideology instead of educating geography? I though Darwinians are desperately concerned about the quality of education in our country. I guess education is not as important as promoting a liberal agenda. Darwinians would prefer a dumb populous that adhere to a Darwinian myth than an intellectually sophisticated public that is capable of critically analyzing Darwinian evolution.