Submitted by Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger
Feigning that some controversy actually exists over the fact of evolution, the Rocky Toppers have decided to grant job protection to teachers who choose to criticize the scientific doctrine. To be quite proper, they have inserted language that stipulates that “this section only protects the teaching of scientific information, and shall not be construed to promote any religious or non-religious doctrine.” But Becky Ashe, the president of the Tennessee Science Teachers Association, is not fooled. She told a subcommittee of the Tennessee House that the Bill “is an anti-evolutionary attempt to allow non-scientific alternatives to evolution (such as creationism and intelligent design) to be introduced into our public schools.”
Seems the famous trial and the movie version (“Inherit The Wind”) are always on the minds of theocrats. Tennessee State Representative Richard Floyd (R) even alluded to them in the floor debate commenting that “since the late ’50s, early ’60s when we let the intellectual bullies hijack our education system, we’ve been on a slippery slope.” Aptly named Republican Sheila Butt even found a way to criticize environmentalists in the debate saying she was told in high school that Aqua Net hair spray hurts the environment. In a conclusion worthy of mention she added, “Since then scientists have said that maybe we shouldn’t have given up that aerosol can because that aerosol can was actually absorbing the Earth’s rays and keeping us from global warming.” Ah, the joys of anti-intellectualism.
The Bill passed the House 70-23 and now goes to the Senate. Hopefully, they reached a stage of high intellectual evolution.
Source: TPM
~Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger
Let’s all take a field trip to the Creation Museum in Kentucky. Maybe Tootie can be our tour guide.
Blouise,
Some old pedophile protecting Hitler Youth touching my feet?
Ewwwwwwww! doesn’t seem quite strong enough.
pete,
I’m particularly proud of the (republican birdwatching society dot com)and carrier pigeons … it was nuanced …
Blouise
you got me on the ushistoryforrepublicans.com. i tried looking that one up.
be a good one to start though
Buddha,
Stinky feet? … the Pope washes feet on Maundy Thursday … you still have time to book a flight … you have to bring your own oil for anointing … and a towel
Good riddance.
good night
Blouise,
I see you are wearing your finely crafted Hat of Sarcasm tonight.
It looks good on you.
Come on.
What’s next?
You going to tell me my feet stink and Jesus doesn’t love me?
“It is rumored that the Supremacy Clause was actually written by Thomas Jefferson and sent by carrier pigeon from his apartments in France to the boys at the Philadelphia State House. The Supremacy Clause contains many “tall words” and Jefferson was a tall man.” (republicanbirdwatchingsocietydotcom)
Awwww.
I’m delusional. Isn’t that cute! Especially coming from someone who thinks the world was created in seven days.
Try again.
I’ve already shown you how the Feds can dictate curricula: if it violates the Constitution, they can forbid it. The teaching of creationism violates the 1st Amendment as it is promoting your religion via governmental mechanisms. The Feds can prohibit this via the Supremacy Clause. This power to prohibit religious promotion by governmental mechanisms is delegated to the Federal government and is thus also rightful under the 10th Amendment.
You twist and shout some more though.
I like a good laugh before bedtime.
Tootles,
No. It’s not difficult for me to accept that you’re talking nonsense about the Constitution.
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
The power to prohibit religious interference in government is expressly delegated to the Federal government by operation of the 1st Amendment.
The 10th Amendment in no way helps your argument.
Buddha: where does it say in the 1st Amendment that the feds have the power to dictate curricula?
You are delusional.
Buhhda:
This will be difficult for you, but be patient.
What does “in pursuance thereof” mean? (I know what it means, but I you probably do not.)
Oh heck, you won’t get it, so read about it here:
http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/01/in-pursuance-thereof/
And the part about the totalitarian? That refers to you and everyone like you who corrupts the meaning of the supremacy clause.
Come on though. Tell me again about how I’m not using the text of the Constitution when I’ve proven you wrong with the 1st Amendment and the Supremacy Clause. That’s really really funny.
Tootles,
I’m not the one frothing at the mouth, sweetie.
I’m the one referencing the specific language of the Constitution that proves you wrong.
Oh, and laughing my ass of your contortions.
No, Tootles.
The Supremacy Clause applies to the entire Constitution, including the Bill of Rights.
Buddha:
You have frothed on and on about everything BUT the text of the Constitution (and thus have failed to prove your argument) and then have the nerve to say I’m zealously ignorant?
LOL