Kansas ... AGAIN!

The election for 4 out of the 6 board members who voted to change the science standards is taking place November 2006. Just thought you might want to know that. Unless my state is experiencing a real error, they'll be gone this time next year.Wiseman45

Well, seeing as how I am from Kansas, I guess I might know a little more about this state than anyone else here (unless they're a scientist who just is infatuated with Kansas or they're from Kansas too.)Here's how it generally is:
1. Kansas is a conservative state. You probably knew that.
2. The kind of thinking which is pushing these new policies exists all over Kansas, but the only place where the people pushing it are a majority is generally in still very rural Western Kansas. There are several barriers between East and West--the first one being distance, (it takes 8 hours to get from Kansas City to Dodge City).
The second one is education (the place that I think is the pinnacle of education, and not surprisingly the most liberal town being Lawrence, while the West certainly isn't well known for it's educational facilities.) Now, I don't mean to be rude: Fundamentalism is a very popular relgious idea arround KC and LawrenceThe third one is elected politicians, who are affected by the above two things. 3 out of 6 board members who pushed for the new sci. standards are from West Kansas.
3. Fundamentalism and Narrow-Minded thinking like this exist predominatly in Western Kansas. Most church/other reilgious groups in the KC metro area (keyword being "most") mind their own business and focus their attention on other more pressing issues for groups like themselves, such as charity organizations and getting mroe members. However, when you hit Topeka (an extreme Chrisitian religious organization called the Phelps group is dedicated to eradicating gays from America). and head Westward, the majority of church groups consider themselves born-again disciples and feel it is their holy duty to impress their thinking on their surroundings and on everyone around them. They elect the kind of board members that are now sitting to push for their plans. Their ultimate goal (as revealed by the extreme measures taken in 2000) is to remove evolution from education, make it an established theory that the world is 6,000 years old and that God is both responsible for and controls everything that happens. Of course, thankfully, they will never get that far, but they can try anyway, and since the big book o' scientific rules prohibit religious ideas like Intellegent Design and Creationism from existing in a public scientific forum (like a biology classroom), they can't play by the rules so they have to change them. Very good point, Mr. RAZD, by the way. This is in their twisted, dumb minds as "the first step" to changing Kansas, and then America, in to a theocracy.Well, I'm done.
I'm sure creationists and ID people will want to criticize me if they read this, and I more than welcome it. I love being criticized and I love arguing. So, bring it on!Wiseman45This message has been edited by wiseman45, 11-10-2005 09:00 PMThis message has been edited by wiseman45, 11-10-2005 09:04 PM

Well, it seems that this whole thing in my beloved state (don't come here, its not that special) might turn out okay after all. In a series of events that is inspired by the results of the Dover, Pennsyvlania, elections, 2 Kansas Board members have been challenged by people who have amazing credentials. The person challenging board member John Bacon is a former biology teacher at the prominent Blue Valley School District, and several others are also considering stepping up to the plate. Most are moderate republicans, and that's good news--Kansas is still a conservative state after all, and people are going to be reluctant about electing a board member full of democrats, even with the recent events.In just a religion vs. secularism side-note, many here probably know that a backlash due to the disappointing performance of senate and congressional republicans is pretty imminent. I predict that the conservatives will most certainly lose control of the senate and lose several seats in congress if they don't lose that too, in 2006. However, it is my personal belief that this nation was founded on general Judeo-Christian values, and a lot of liberals may want to use their newfound power to secularize America. For starters, I'm fairly certain that this would not be a good thing. Just as conservatives can get out of hand, as they have, liberals can get overzealous about secularism. With toleration of lawsuits gaining footholds over a kid saying "under god" in the pledge of allegiance, if America is further secularized, where will we go next? I'm no slippery slope theorist--don't interpret me as such. But I'm just pointing out that you can't go too far, either way. Left or Right.Wiseman45

Just to make a point: here's somethings that the extremes on both sides want, and why those things are bad:For Evangelicals:
1. Most extreme evangelicals want to have pastors and ministers to be the only eligible candidates for President. Some even want them to be appointed, and have democracy totally abolished, and for the religious leader to have ultimate power.2. The same kind of crowd (were talking about American Christian Militia folks here) wants to have it so that scientific thinking that goes against the Bible in any way shape or form doesn't exist in a public forum. Kansas State Board of Education Member Connie Morris is one of these people."Evolution is a fairy tale. Evolution is physically, chemically, biologically, and phenomenally impossible."--Morris.3. They also want to have only Christians living in the country, and deport (or even kill) everyone else. They want the military to lead a campaign to exterminate all muslims and jews in the world, using nukes if necessary. They absolutely despise the U.S.'s support of Israel.4. They want gays to be eradicated worldwide by any means necessary, and anyone who supports gays to be executed.5. They're convinced that every natural disaster that has happened recently (I.E., the Indonesian Tsunami, Hurricane Katrina, etc.) is god's punishment on un-believers and sinners.On the other hand, here's what extreme secularists/aethiests think.1. Christians and every other kind of relgionist should be locked up in some prison where they can practice their beliefs but can't bother anyone.2. They want legal action to be taken against missionaries across the world. Total destruction of religious aid efforts, like Christian Mission efforts in Africa to feed starving people. Now, I totally disagree with this whole equation that some African missions have been practicing: Bible+Love of Jesus=food. That's exploitation.Well that's all I have to say. Just wanted to justify myself in front of the recent crticism I've recieved. Note: I did not want to imply that secularism is a bad thing: just too much of it (in a public forum) is a bad thing. Same thing with religion.Just as another note, I think that the pledge of allegiance should be abolished, too. What I meant by the whole under god thing was I opoose it, because it was added during the Ike years. Well, we're not living in the 50's anymore right? No, Kansas isn't heading towards the 50's...It's headed towards the Dark Ages. I'm simply respecting peoples right to say "under god" on coins and such if the majority wants to. And, I bet they do.I don't like to be redundant. I'm not being redundant.
Until Now.
Wiseman45This message has been edited by wiseman45, 11-14-2005 12:58 PMThis message has been edited by wiseman45, 11-14-2005 12:59 PM

Okay, we're getting WAY off the main topic here. I don't want the admins to close this thread...Meanwhile though, I was merely trying to show how the fringe right/left think. Most of the things I said about evangelicals and secularists might be a little over the edge. I agree with most of the anti-evangelical things I stated, but I do not agree with the anti-secularism. I'm fully for secularism in a lot of areas...didn't you read my last paragraph?Before we jump to conclusions that I'm some sort of bible-thumper, folks, read my whole statement. Please. It prevents things from happening like this.As for some the extreme things that evangelicals say, if you want proof of those statements, just watch the 700 club. 2 minutes of Pat Robertson and a whole bunch of nasty words will be flying out of your mouth. Unless you agree with him. That's fine too, I suppose...(???)Wiseman45

The FRINGE Secularists. Stop acting like I said all secularists are like this, please...If you interpreted it as such YOU MISSED MY INTENTION, OKAY?But you know, I really want to end this NOW. I see I didn't get where I wanted, so somebody post something new, otherwise I'll see all you people soon and I'll post something else.Meanwhile, I'd like to repeat that I'm all for secularism.This message has been edited by wiseman45, 11-14-2005 01:45 PM

Oh well, let's move on...Meanwhile, as part of an organization I'm in, I will soon get to speak to Kansas Board Member Sue Gamble on December 1st. Keep reading my stuff, and I will post anything I get out of her. I promise!The reason I said that I thought a swing back to the mainstream in Kansas was imminent, well, because it is. Here, now all 6 members who voted for the new standards now have challengers. The people of Kansas who are not fundamentalist airheads are outraged over this whole thing. I read the Kansas City Star regularly, and I haven't seen a fundamentalist-supporting letter in days. That is a good sign, and a bad sign for the current board members."For evidence that evolution works very slowly, ponder the Kansas Board of Education and its electorate.In 1999, a board majority that had been elected as conservative but not specifically anti-evolution pushed creationism into the state's science curriculum. The next year, an appalled electorate voted the anti-evolution zealots out, and the anti-science "standards" were scrapped.End of issue, right? Not exactly. Here we go again.Gulled anew, Kansans elected another conservative slate two years ago and, sure enough, it has now ordered "intelligent design" - a re-gimmicked version of creationism - into the state' science classes. And this time, the board went further.The board answered the awkward criticism that intelligent design fits no definition of science by simply redefining science, scrapping the phrase "a search for natural explanations of observable phenomena."If unadmittedly, that was to make room for God - specifically, if only implicitly, the Christian God - but it equally opens the way for magic, gremlins and things that go bump in the night.This is the common pattern. Voters sucker for conservative candidates, often running as champions of back-to-basics schooling and traditional values, and find they have installed anti-science activists.If the courts don't get to the resulting anti-evolution hustles first and bar them as patently unconstitutional efforts to bootleg religion into the public schools, the voters typically vote the scoundrels out at the first opportunity.That happened again this November in Dover, Pa., where the school system was hauled into federal court after a board majority added intelligent design to science classes. All eight of the anti-evolution incumbents were booted.Kansas voters will have another crack at a reversal next year, when four of the six state school board members who ordered the schools to teach specific anti-evolution arguments are up for re-election.But there is more at play here than just the comings and goings of local school board candidates.The so-called family values crowd - have even declared against approval of a vaccine that would prevent cervical cancer, on the grounds that it would encourage folks to have sex. Better 5,000 or so dead women a year than fewer virgins.It turns out the Know Nothing Party didn't die with the 19th century after all."
--Article on Tallahassee Democrat
if you want verification.Well, there you go. Come around 2006, that Board will be gone, and the new people in there, (as they have already been promising) are going to change these standards back. The Evangelicals have been blowing thousands of dollars on PR campaigns using tax-free, donated money, but now that people have seen logic, science will win. No matter how long this debate goes on, science will win, because there's no logic behind creationism, just belief in miracles. And that cannot be allowed to stand up to science.(Message to the ADMINS: you may notice that I modified this article. I left out those parts which I thought didn't make a good point. However, I did not add anything to it, and those who want to see the whole thing can follow the provided link, though if you're a republican, I probably wouldn't beacause it has a bunch of liberal political jargon.)Wiseman45This message has been edited by wiseman45, 11-15-2005 11:47 AMThis message has been edited by wiseman45, 11-15-2005 11:49 AMThis message has been edited by wiseman45, 11-15-2005 11:58 AM