And really that fits with every campaign for school board by creationists. The point is to run below the radar and then institute changes once in power. See Kansas ad nauseum.
But the larger point isn’t what his platform is, it’s that he views creationism as reasonable science. It’s simply not even if you call it intelligent design and that sort of judgment on curriculum matters is a significant reason voters should be aware of people pushing junk science. School boards review curriculum and someone reviewing curriculum without a basic understanding of science–science degree or not–is a problem.
That is, unless John thinks intelligent design should be in the University of Illinois’ curriculum, but not Unit 4’s. It’s the kind of candidates like Bambenek who create the problem. All of a sudden there is a proposal before the board to include creationism in the curriculum and people get treated to idiotic choices that cost the District a bunch in court costs.
Beyond that other warning signs are John’s comparison of premarital sex to slavery. I have some sense he’ll be an advocate, whether it’s in his ‘platform’ or not, for abstinence only education instead of a comprehensive program based on medically accurate information. Abstinence only has shown virtually no promise in reducing teen pregnancy and STD prevalence, but yet many still insist on it instead of abstinence plus medically accurate information about contraception and safe sex.
All there is to creationism, is two chapters, in the bible. Beyond that, is mere speculation, as, there is no scientific evidence, on our’ world, that backs up, creation, as espoused in Genesis, as, this is theology, not science.
We could allow, Genesis to be taught in science class. We simply allow the teacher time to read the two chapters of Genesis to the class, and then put aside the bible, and teach science.
Unfortunately, when Darwin introduced, evolution as a theory, and science began teaching this theory, as somthing it embraced, the church, dropped science, altogether, and began a crusade against all science. Now, there is a sharp dividing line between theology and science, that is better left standing, because of the number of people with no biblical knowledge, and only a mere rudimentary understanding of science, we must allow both to prosper in peace, beside each other.
Copyright 2007 Mark Robert Gates
please my blogs:
http://lokieponaphoenix.blogspot.com/
http://wellnessempowered.blogspot.com/
I wonder if Bambanek will be getting Roeser dollars like Pinney and others in the Chicago burbs.
Scuttlebutt around the NW burbs is that the radical right is prepping another big run for HS District 214 to give Pinney a few more compatriots on that board… She only won by 400 votes two years ago by targetting an incumbent who sat on his duff for the election thinking he’d have a cakewalk. He was easy pickins’.
Do we know yet if Bambanek is in a contested race or is it one of those “Choose 3” deals where there are only 3 candidates?
I guess I would ask what is wrong with ID or creationism being in any university. God knows universities teach items that qualify as junk so if you consider religion junk, what is one more piece of it?
The other thing I would add is that while no one can ever prove the existance of God (that is why religion is called a faith) no one has proven that evolution took place. There have been a few “scientists” who have made up items and a few who phonied up some evidence but no one has proven it. It is mere speculation. In all the time we have been around have any of us seen one species evolve into another?
So while you are lamenting about religion and ID or creationism or whatever you want to call it, please have the decency to be consistent in your assessment. If ID is junk science then certainly evolution is as well. Since neither has been proven we can teach them both or neither of them.
I wonder how many classes the universities have on the peaceful religion of Islam. Now there is junk science if I ever saw it.
John is a decent guy and can do any job without letting his personal beliefs get in the way of sound judgement. Perhaps that quality is what scares you libs.
The Dog has spoken.
===The other thing I would add is that while no one can ever prove the existance of God (that is why religion is called a faith) no one has proven that evolution took place.
And here is where the problem starts. Science doesn’t prove, mathematics does. Science infers.
===There have been a few “scientists” who have made up items and a few who phonied up some evidence but no one has proven it.
A few have phonied up some evidence? Interesting. You don’t seem to have even a basic grasp of modern biology in which evolution is the central organizing principle. You might try this for a good run down on the evidence for common descent:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
===It is mere speculation. In all the time we have been around have any of us seen one species evolve into another?
Speciation has been observed many times:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html
===So while you are lamenting about religion and ID or creationism or whatever you want to call it,
Creationism and ID are specific beliefs of fundamentalist Christians. Catholics and the mainline Protestant denominations do not believe in either concept as their faith. So confusing the notion of religion, ID and creationism being the same thing is a profoundly ignorant statement.
If you notice, I don’t attack religion in the above, but a specific belief that Bambenek and others attempt to sell as science instead of as faith. People can believe anything they want, but that doesn’t mean they get to push their belief into the science curriculum at public institutions.
—please have the decency to be consistent in your assessment.
Please attempt to even know something about biological evolution before spouting about it. It has gotten very old over the years of having to argue with people who put up strawman arguments about it and then having to attempt to teach them the most basic points about science.
—-If ID is junk science then certainly evolution is as well. Since neither has been proven we can teach them both or neither of them.
Again, science isn’t about proof, you are confusing it with mathematics.
===I wonder how many classes the universities have on the peaceful religion of Islam. Now there is junk science if I ever saw it.
Yeah, you are really confused about that science concept. Islam is taught in religion departments just as Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, the Sikh faith, Hinduism, and hell even Shintoism. Religion as a discipline is in the humanities. The study of religion may utilize the scientific method or it may utilize other methodologies, but it is not considered a science even as say economics, psychology or political science are.
The more basic problem appears to be your rather amusing anti-intellectualism towards actually, you know, understanding something. One of the benefits of education is that you can utilize what you learn to understand and address problems so if one thinks of Islam inherently as a problem, it’s generally good to know something about it other than what you saw on the teevee or Powerline last night.
Hey, you’ve seen his platform? Cool. Do you have a link to it so I can see it, too?
Hey, Mark Robert Gates: Did you copyright the comma? Looks like you not only copyrighted it, but must be getting royalties from it, as well. Commas are to be used sparingly; not every three words.
Also, why would I want to “please your blogs”? I don’t even know your blogs, and they haven’t even bought me dinner yet. I take it English is not your first language.
Good luck on your career, whatever that may be that you feel it so important as to copyright it. I certainly hope you’re not a registered voter.
Ms.U
God knows universities teach items that qualify as junk so if you consider religion junk, what is one more piece of it?
I’m not sure what “junk” universities are teaching. If there’s something that’s demonstrably incorrect in a science curriculum, you should bring it to their attention. They’ll probably be happy to correct it.
I work at the same university as Bambenek, and I’m not aware of Islam being taught in any science class.
I am sorry, whoever, decided to comment, on a comment, by avoiding actually commenting, on the given comment, itself, had to sign as a woman.
Now, back to the topic.
Copyright 2007 Mark Robert Gates
please my blogs:
http://lokieponaphoenix.blogspot.com/
http://wellnessempowered.blogspot.com/
For some reason, I seem to recall Bambenek actually being for teaching Intelligent Design at the collegiate level. Not quite sure where I read it.