News 2020
Judge rules against teaching of intelligent design
A Texas judge has ruled unconstitutional the teaching of "intelligent design" to students of recent American history.
The case arose when residents of the town of Long Haul, TX sued the local Authority for the Betterment of Youthful Socialisation and Mentation after it voted to make intelligent design a compulsory feature of history courses.
The plaintiffs contended that the teaching of the history of the war for Arab liberation earlier this century would be fatally compromised by the inclusion of arguments based on intelligent design.
In particular, the role of private corporations such as reconstruction agency Hallibechtel Humanitarian Enterprises and civilian security firm Blackbox 911 would be "prejudicially recurricularised", the plaintiffs claimed.
The defence claim that "market forces" could not alone explain the awarding of so many contracts to the upright and deserving was ruled unproveable by Judge Golliper Knook in what is being seen as a landmark judgement.
In summing up, Judge Knook criticised the ABYSM for failing to think its position through. "If we say, without sufficient historical evidence, that certain phenomena are caused by intelligent design, then the teaching of history becomes a farce," he said.
"If we accept intelligent design for the question of Hallibechtel contracts, then who knows - next we might be asked to accept that millions of people die of malnutrition every so often because of some human agency, rather than because, thanks to market forces, stuff happens now and then," the judge concluded.
"The idea that there was some kind of deliberative intelligence behind the awarding of those contracts is a plain violation of everything the Homeland Constitution stands for," said plaintiff-oriented spokesperson Chuckster Hasselhoff.
A Texas judge has ruled unconstitutional the teaching of "intelligent design" to students of recent American history.
The case arose when residents of the town of Long Haul, TX sued the local Authority for the Betterment of Youthful Socialisation and Mentation after it voted to make intelligent design a compulsory feature of history courses.
The plaintiffs contended that the teaching of the history of the war for Arab liberation earlier this century would be fatally compromised by the inclusion of arguments based on intelligent design.
In particular, the role of private corporations such as reconstruction agency Hallibechtel Humanitarian Enterprises and civilian security firm Blackbox 911 would be "prejudicially recurricularised", the plaintiffs claimed.
The defence claim that "market forces" could not alone explain the awarding of so many contracts to the upright and deserving was ruled unproveable by Judge Golliper Knook in what is being seen as a landmark judgement.
In summing up, Judge Knook criticised the ABYSM for failing to think its position through. "If we say, without sufficient historical evidence, that certain phenomena are caused by intelligent design, then the teaching of history becomes a farce," he said.
"If we accept intelligent design for the question of Hallibechtel contracts, then who knows - next we might be asked to accept that millions of people die of malnutrition every so often because of some human agency, rather than because, thanks to market forces, stuff happens now and then," the judge concluded.
"The idea that there was some kind of deliberative intelligence behind the awarding of those contracts is a plain violation of everything the Homeland Constitution stands for," said plaintiff-oriented spokesperson Chuckster Hasselhoff.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home