Mike the Mad Biologist suggests this:
One way pro-science citizens can influence what local and state governments do is through federal funding. The next time any educational legislation is proposed, a key component should be the release of federal support for educational programs contingent upon the adoption of educational standards that do not accept intelligent design creationism as science and that also support the study of evolution.
It is possible. The mechanism for this is in place to some extent. There is the No Child Left Behind policy which demands certain things happen at the state level. Attempts have been made to hijack that legislation to INCLUDE creationism. Why not hijack it to EXCLUDE creationism?
This will all depend on how the next couple of elections go...
Life Science
Comments
The only reason I am against this is because it puts us at the same level as IDiots, where the scientific process is bypassed and instead the issue is left to politicians and the courts.
Posted by: Webs | December 3, 2007 1:57 PM
There are specific "no federal mandate" clauses in NCLBA. The feds very clearly state that they impose no curriculum quality standards on the states. The feds require state standards and testing, but refuse to write any federal curriculum standards.
Posted by: Reed A. Cartwright | December 3, 2007 3:15 PM
Webs: I get your point, but keep this in mind: The fight to keep creationism out of the schools has only barely involved the simple fact that "evolutionary biology" is acceptable and creationism is not. Had there not been a First Amendment Issue there would not have been ACLU legal teams pulling our nuts out of the fire. It would be nice to win on the basis of truth, but so far we have not won anything on that basis (though it has been a factor)
Reed: Indeed, which is why I used the phrase "certain things". ... I'm pretty sure I don't want to advocate for a federal curriculum! But I might advocate for a federal rule that curriculum not violate the first amendment or any other laws of the land. Perhaps this could be snuck in along with an anti-terrorism clause of the NCLB act....
Posted by: Greg Laden | December 3, 2007 3:42 PM