Uncivil Discourse

Because civility is overrated.

Tuesday, August 02, 2005

That Design's Just Stupid

Oh, lordy, lordy, lordy. So our president, who wants to be remembered as the "education" president, has decided the best way to continue giving science the middle finger is to get it early -- he's declared that he wants all our kids to be fucking stupid. That's right, he think it's a good idea to teach intelligent design creationism alongside evolution in biology classes. As PZ Myers put it, "It's only a small fillip on the vast rococo monument to incompetence, anti-science, and lies that the Republican party has erected over our country."

But, you might be asking, why is this so bad? After all, it's another theory, right? What could be wrong with presenting it in a science class? Why can't you, as one reasonably prominent conservative blog (via John Cole) show why there is no controversy, why ID and evolution don't contradict each other, while even explicitly stating that ID isn't a comparable scientific theory to evolution? The problem is this: your punk ass would be specifically talking about ID in a science class, as a theory, even if not a science class, which in of itself gives it credibility it doesn't deserve and shouldn't have. ID should not be mentioned anywhere near science. Shit, if a theory's a bad scientific theory, that's one thing. Mention it in class and point out its problems all you want. This isn't even that. Calling IDC "science" is like calling watching your friend fuck a blowup doll with your hands tied "having sex." It's not the same thing. It's not anything you could even plausibly describe as being similar to the same thing. If you want to do that, talk about naturalism in general and why it's essential to the very idea of science. Don't mention ID except as a form of creationism. Just in passing, nothing more. Again, Myers puts it perfectly:

And that is what should be taught: teachers, we need to get in front of our students and expose them to both sides. We need to stand up and plainly state that creationism is a lie and any attempt to incorporate faith and the supernatural into science is as destructive to the enterprise as would be requiring religion to provide concrete, repeatable tests of their beliefs.
And whether or not this conservative blogger is right on Bush wanting IDC to be discussed in the context of "origin of life," let's not forget it's creationism. The designer is God. Who else could it be?

So, Bush wants our kids to be stupid and have no idea what science is. This shouldn't surprise anyone. After all, he wants our kids to grow up to be cheap labor, to be mindless soldier drones ("bad apples," if you will), and, most of all, to vote Republican.

Post about the Church of Bush coming tomorrow, I guess.

Update: Question asked by Protein Wisdom updated to more explicitly capture the nuance of his position. My reaction remains.