I’ve returned to Georgia, and I wanted to look back over the most recent posts that focused on the actions of the Texas Board of Education on the teaching of theory (of evolution, expansion of the Universe, and all others) in science class.  A good review of the events in Texas are contained in an article that appeared in Newsweek Magazine entitled The Texas-Size Debate over Teaching Evolution by Christopher Hitchens.

If you recall, the Texas Board voted on the new science standards for the state, and in a last minute move, voted to make sure that whenever science teachers discuss theory, they must present both sides.  Of course, their real mission was to force science teachers to include claims from the intelligent design “side” when evolution is taught.  Here is what Hitchens said with regard to this issue:

So by all means let’s “be honest with the kids,” as Dr. Don McLeroy, the chairman of the Texas education board, wants us to be. The problem is that he is urging that the argument be taught, not in a history or in a civics class, but in a biology class. And one of his supporters on the board, Ken Mercer, has said that evolution is disproved by the absence of any transitional forms between dogs and cats. If any state in the American union gave equal time in science class to such claims, it would certainly make itself unique in the world (perhaps no shame in that). But it would also set a precedent for the sharing of the astronomy period with the teaching of astrology, or indeed of equal time as between chemistry and alchemy. Less boring perhaps, but also much less scientific and less educational.

According to Eugenie Scott, Director of the National Center for Science Education, “politics won out in Texas.”  Politics will always be involved in the making of educational policy, and as we saw in Texas, the ideology of creationism and intelligent design was a strong force opposing the scientific communities approach to teaching [evolution].