Re: Georgia and the "E" word

How about "change-over-time-related program activities"?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Freeman, Louise Margaret" <lfreeman@mbc.edu>
To: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2004 11:16 AM
Subject: Re: Georgia and the "E" word

> Classic double-speak, IMHO, reflecting political cowardice. I wonder what
> term they intend to substitute for the concept they do plan to teach.
> "Natural selection-based speciation"?
>
> Bad in the long term for science, in that Georgian students would graduate
> from high school without knowing a key vocabulary word that most colleges
> will expect them to know. Worse in the long term for those opposing
> evolution on religious grounds, since during it into a "dirty word" only
> reinforces the (IMHO erroneous) notion that evolution threatens religion.
>
> I am reminded of those who think federal funding of religious programs
will
> be more palatable to the public if they are called "faith-based
> initiatives." Those who support them would still support them if they were
> called by their proper name: "religious." Those who oppose them see
through
> the double-speak and still oppose them.
>
> Those who support the teaching of evolutionary theory have no reason to
> object to the name. Those who oppose it are opposed to a concept, not a
> word.
>
> Louise (Emory grad and also a Jimmy Carter fan!)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: douglas.hayworth@perbio.com
> To: asa@calvin.edu
> Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 09:41:33 -0600
> Subject: Georgia and the "E" word
>
> > Any comments or insights on the recent debate in Georgia about avoiding
> > use
> > of the word "evolution" in school textbooks?
> >
> > I must say that I can understand Kathy Cox's reasons for wanting to
> > avoid
> > the word itself (but not the actual teaching of the topic) because it
> > turns
> > people off before they have studied the biology and evidence, etc.
> > However, based on the reaction, her proposal seems to have backfired.
> >
> > I was somewhat surprised and impressed that Jimmy Carter made a
> > statement
> > about the affair (apparently in support of keeping full treatment of
> > evolution by name as well as content). I can't say that I am in any way
> > an
> > expert on Jimmy Carter, but I am usually impressed by what I hear about
> > him
> > when his name comes up in the news. Here's a Christian who seems to
> > have
> > his head screwed on correctly!
> >
> > Douglas
>
>
Received on Thu Feb 5 10:42:31 2004