John McCain pretty much had a lock on my vote for the 2008 election. The purpose of this blog is other than politics so I am not going to go into why I thought he was the best candidate. Instead I would like to discuss why I may have to change my vote.

The issue is "Intelligent Design" AKA "Creationism". Apparently McCain's views on the teaching of evolution and the teaching of creationism is that each is a point of view and each point of view should be taught.

Well, Senator, Astrology and Numerology are points of view. Should we teach them beside Astronomy and Mathematics? Phrenologyis a point of view. Should we teach it beside neuroscience? I sincerely hope the senator would have the common sense, even though he says he is not a scientist, to see that "points of view" and "science" are not the same thing. Point's of view don't cure disease, solve problems in physics, help design the next generation of computers, launch a spaceship, etc. A point of view is not a scientific criteria. Scientists follow a process and within the boundaries of that process there can be different "points of view". "Intelligent Design" does not follow the process of science. This has been well established, so it would be silly to repeat the points here.

Can McCain be convinced to abandon this position? Well just to get my vote he probably can't but I think its time for a little grass roots action in the states where McCain has to have victory to become president. There must be enough rational folks out there to help convince the senator to abandon his foolhardy stance.

Anyone interested?

I frankly consider it not only absurd that proponents of Creationism are striving to replace the Theory of Evolution with religious teachings, but also extremely dangerous.

If we begin to allow religious narrations take priority over the teaching of sound scientific fundamentals, then our days as a leading nation will be coming to an end.

Instead of rejecting science, America should now be embracing it more than ever. We still have a strong lead over our rivals, but China and India have hundreds of millions of youth who are enthusiastic and embraceful of science, and they will pose a strong challenge to our current leadership position in the years to come. If we allow Mumbo Jumbo to be taught in our classrooms, we allow ourselves to fall behind and lose the mantle.

I would be for a voucher system if it ever made it to the ballot. If you look back to the 50's and 60's and look at children's performance then, it was much better for a variety of reasons. The main one was that the schools had more local control and the local people had more control of the curriculum. Move ahead 40-50 years and we find that God had been effectively outlawed in the public schools, even though the Constitution only give freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. The powers that be are beginning to realize that how much money we spend per pupil and test scores have no reliable correlation. Many are looking at vouchers and other ways to get the job done. With budget cuts, even here in California, even the liberals are talking vouchers some to make ends meet in the schools. Me? Well my oldest went to public school and learned both before the modern thinking liberal mentality made it to the boonies. . We sucked it up and paid to send my youngest to a Christian school.
The bigger picture is that the next president may appoint as many as 3 Supreme Court Justices. Do you want Hillary or Barack doing that?

Baccus:
China, India, most of the middle east, the far east including Japan, Korea etc. teach their own brand of creationism in their schools. I have been there and seen it. I don't think that it should replace evolution, but it should get at least a little time, at least as an elective. I learned both 50 years ago, didn't seem to hurt me. Both my kids were taught both-- my youngest in a Christian school. And if you believe that this hurts education, pull the California test scores. The public schools are pretty poor and we throw a ton of money at them. Hasn't seemed to hurt my kids any to learn both either. My oldest is a geologist making tons of $$ and working on her doctorate. My youngest is majoring in Business and hasn't graduated as of yet.

Where these countries differ is that they evaluate the needs of their economies and then evaluate the student and basically tell them what they are going to major in. They take away the freedom of choice, but their students appear to be doing better and filling a need that we can't because the councilors don't help students with courses of study where there is an actual need in the economy. They ask what the student wants to major in and here's what you need to get there. No real guidance or thought to what jobs are in short supply. All I had to do is tweak my kid's interest a little bit and point them in the right direction.

I've also travelled to Asia and I have many friends from Asia, being in San Francisco, and they say that they learn evolution in the schools. Particularly those from China, an atheist country.

As far as placing students into careers without a choice, I believe China stopped doing that at least 10 years ago along with their capitalist reforms. I don't think Japan, Korea or India ever did that. But perhaps you are referring to encouragement or guidance, which is different from force.

The quality of our students are suffering from many aspects, but I believe the least of this has to do with the removal of religion from the classroom. Although the denigration of the teaching of evolution will surely speed up that process. The main issues plaguing are school are largely cultural and tied to our value system. Students do not respect teachers, and increasingly, a culture of anti-intellectualism is also growing.

For a period of my life, I went to an inner city school and witnessed anti-intellectualism at its height. Those who strived to advance themselves intellectually were denigrated, while those who respond to any intellectual question with a "I don't know that shiiiiit!" attitude were considered "cool". When I was a kid, it affected my attitude as well. I pretended to be more ignorant than I was just to fit in, but it goes to show you how powerful social forces are.

China may be officially an atheist country, but then what are all those temples across the countryside? I think they would be better defined as a pluralism. No, I am not for eliminating any kind of science from the classroom and replacing it with the Bible. I would like to see electives on religion available in public schools for those who wish to learn about various religions then draw their own conclusion, but not as a required class. And if any student wants some quite time or meet with other students of their own religion and read the whatever book their religion reads during breaks, then it should be allowed. There still is a lot of religion in the public schools, especially in the rural areas. It's just not officially taught. It's just too bad in many areas, they have to do it in secret. I pulled my youngest out of public school in the third grade while she was admonished by a teacher for saying a blessing over her lunch.

Private school test scores are higher for a number of complex reasons. It probably has more to do with the involvement of the parents more than anything else. That.s why I favor a voucher system, so those who can't afford it, can take there kids to the school where they feel that they will get the best education. Many European countries and couple of our state and a few US cities do have a modified voucher system of one kind or another with mixed results. Whether thing get better or not seem to be how it is administered. There is now plenty of information out there to go through and separate the good from the bad and come up with a system that works.

As far as placing students into a career without a choice, that is not what I meant. I meant perhaps taking the time to find out what the students interests are and then give then a list of careers that are in that interest area that are needed in the country and that they can have a career upon graduation. Then after than, if they still choose a major that is not needed or saturated, then God bless them, but don't come crying to me when you can't get a job and tell me the economy sucks ..... In the LA Times on this past Monday, there were no fewer than 9 pages of job advertisements for skilled positions that there is no one to fill.