[SB 554] is an attempt to bring parity to subject matter taught in our public schools, paid for by the taxpayers and driven by a religious ideology. I’m talking about the religion of evolution. Yes, it is a religion. The religion of evolution requires as much faith as the belief in a loving God, when all the facts are considered (mainly the statistical impossibility of key factors).This year he's pushing SB 1742, the Oklahoma Science Education Act. The statute in the bill comes from the Louisiana Science Education Act (LSEA), which passed in 2008, and has yet to be tested in court. However, it excludes LSEA's provisions for regulation of teaching in local school districts.
There are two main ways in which SB 1742 differs from similar bills the Oklahoma legislature has considered. First, rather than require local school districts to instruct students in arguments against particular scientific theories, it would allow them to do so, and would require the State Board of Education to provide assistance. Second, it indicates that the secular purpose of the instruction would be to promote "critical thinking, logical analysis, open and objective discussion of scientific theories."
SB 1742 would allow teachers to "use supplemental textbooks and instructional materials to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review scientific theories," including "evolution, the origin of life, global warming, and human cloning." However, the ostensible learning objective is utterly unrealistic, and the supplements themselves purport to provide objective review, analysis, and criticism. Thus it is patently dishonest to suggest that the supplements merely "help" the students.
When a bill like this reaches the floor for a vote, demagoguery walks in the door, and rationality flies out the window. Thus it is essential to stop it at an earlier stage of the legislative process. Members of the Senate Education Committee and the Subcommittee on Education of the Senate Appropriations Committee (see below) will consider SB 1742, and I ask those of you who live in Oklahoma to contact them as soon as possible.
Why exclude LSEA's provisions for regulation?
Here is the proposed law, along with substantive text deleted from the Louisiana law:
A. The State Board of Education, upon the request of a school district board of education, shall allow and assist teachers, principals, and school administrators in creating an environment within the public school system that promotes critical thinking, logical analysis,Barbara Forrest1 reports that after LSEA passed, the Louisiana Department of Education drafted regulations forbidding what the act putatively does not promote:
andopen and objective discussion of scientific theories being studiedincluding, but not limited to, evolution, the origin of life, global warming, and human cloning. Assistance shall include support and guidance for teachers regarding effective ways to help students understand, analyze, critique, and objectively review scientific theories being studied, including those enumerated in this subsection.
B. A teacher shall teach the material presented in the standard science textbook and
thereaftermay use supplemental textbooks and instructional materials to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review scientific theories in an objective manner , as permitted by the… local public school board unless otherwise prohibited by the State Board of… Education.
C. This act shall not be construed to promote any religious doctrine
, promote discrimination for or against a particularor set of religious beliefs , or promote discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion.
D. The State Board of Education
and each… local public school boardshall adopt and promulgate therules and regulations necessaryto implement the provisions of this act.
- Religious beliefs shall not be advanced under the guise of encouraging critical thinking.
- Materials that teach creationism or intelligent design or that advance the religious belief that a supernatural being created humankind shall be prohibited for use in science classes.
Senate Education Committee
This committee will consider SB 1742 first. Provide your street address in email notes.
Senator John Ford (R) (Chair) email@example.com 405-521-5634
Senator Gary Stanislawski (Vice Chair) firstname.lastname@example.org 405-521-5624
Senator Cliff Branan (R) email@example.com (405) 521-5543
Senator Josh Brecheen (R) (sponsor of the bill)
Senator Greg Childers (R) firstname.lastname@example.org (405) 521-5522
Senator Kim David (R) email@example.com (405) 521-5590
Senator Judy Eason McIntyre (D) firstname.lastname@example.org 405-521-5598
Senator Earl Garrison (D) email@example.com 405-521-5533
Senator Jim Halligan (R) firstname.lastname@example.org 405-521-5572
Senator David Holt (R) email@example.com (405) 521-5636
Senator Clark Jolley (R) firstname.lastname@example.org (405) 521-5622
Senator Charlie Laster (D) email@example.com (405) 521-5539
Senator Richard Lerblance (D) firstname.lastname@example.org (405) 521-5604
Senator Mike Mazzei (R) email@example.com 405-521-5675
Senator Jonathan Nichols (R) firstname.lastname@example.org (405) 521-5535
Senator Susan Paddack (D) email@example.com 405-521-5541
Senator John Sparks (D) firstname.lastname@example.org 405-531-5553
Subcommittee on Education of the Senate Appropriations Committee
I've omitted contact information for senators listed above.
Sen. Jim Halligan (Chair)
Sen. John Ford
Sen. Cliff Aldridge (R) email@example.com 405-521-5584
Senator Josh Brecheen
Sen. Rick Brinkley (R) firstname.lastname@example.org 405-521-5586
Sen. Judy Eason McIntyre
Sen. Earl Garrison
Sen. Mike Mazzei
Sen. Susan Paddack
Sen. Frank Simpson (R) email@example.com 405-531-5607
Sen. John Sparks
Sen. Gary Stanislawski
1 Professor Forrest, who provided expert testimony on the intelligent design movement in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, has provided gobs of information relevant to SB 1742 on the Louisiana Coalition for Science blog.