A few days ago I pointed out the many, many ways in which Charley Morasch is a wacked out Christian Reconstructionist who has no place in setting educational policy for our children. His endorsement of bad history was pretty bad, but his lengthy, inaccurate and ill-informed defense of intelligent design was reason enough to reject him At the time, I neglected to point out that the incumbent, Clinton O. Robinson, is a very good candidate. Here's his response to the ID question:
8. Should intelligent design be taught in the public schools? If so, in what context or class?
No
End of discussion. Exactly right.
Categories
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Charley Morasch is a wingnut. Here are some answers to questions from the Kansas City Star:
What would you like to accomplish if elected/re-elected to the school board?
• Provide a stimulus to improve social studies curriculum to include the words and ideas of the founding fathers, and the legal…
When I came home from work, and saw the headline: DeVos Backs
Discussion of Intelligent Design, I knew I wanted to blog it.
Alas, I get the afternoon paper.
href="http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2006/09/devos_and_intelligent_design.php#more">Ed
Brayton gets the
href="http://www.freep.…
I have to confess that I'm beginning to wonder why I had previously thought Dean Esmay was really interested in a reasoned discussion about ID in public schools. Following his post of a few weeks ago asking for someone who is opposed to ID to explain the negative consequences of teaching about ID…
Ah Egnor. The chief purveyor of foot-in-mouth disease at Evolution News and Views takes on Dunford's recent post on the intellectual dishonesty of the intelligent design creationist movement and shows exactly why Dunford has a point.
Intelligent design is a cheesy attempt to smear a patina of…