I'd rather pay $10, $50, even $100 for a mouse that will last for decades and was made locally under environmental standards, and can be recycled upon failure (not buried or shipped to Singapore to be me melted down by five-year-olds).
Have you thought that shipping it to Singapore to be melted down by five-year-olds is recycling and may even be what happens to most of the gadgets you recycle. I wouldn't know. I think most plastics are recycled here, but I know a lot of electronics is shipped over seas.
Seems to be all he does on that blog. Find things he disagrees with, and accuses the researchers of making mistakes. Hence the 100 posts proceeding this one criticizing climate scientists, even though he's not qualified.
That's a fallacy. Just because he's been crazy in the past doesn't necessarily mean he's being crazing now. Argue about the idea not the person.
Of course a bill like this might be used to shelter some anti-evolutionist thinking.
That's the goal, not a side effect
Even if someone is questioning evolution in class, there are enough other viewpoints in the outside world that the truth will come through. And doesn't it make a stronger case for evolution when you have considered and dismissed the counter-arguments? Wouldn't that make for a better student to not just be told how something is, but to learn how to debate the way things are to consider future issues too?
No one is suggesting banning research that is against evolution. But if it's flawed (which has been the case for all creationist/ID "research" so far) than it doesn't belong in science class. As it currently stands, if any credible research contradicted evolution, science teachers could present legally, making this bill unnecessary.
If you disagree strongly enough as a parent with what is being taught, then seek to remove that teacher
How? The district can't fire them for what they teach. There would be no legal way to fire them unless the committed some other offence.
rather than force all teachers to toe a politically correct line for whatever current group-think is fashionable. But let the determination of how appropriate a teachers words are come from parents, not from a bureaucracy above.
But if school districts aren't allowed to consider what a science teacher actually teaches, then they'll have to make hiring designs based on other qualifications and what the candidates are willing to work for. What if a creationist offers to teach science significantly less than the other candidates. If his church or another creationist organization was willing to help support him and he was decently qualified, he'd be the only candidate the school board could legally hire
In the meantime it's good to truly protect freedom of speech
Would you support a barring school districts from firing a math teacher who told students 2+2=5? How about a geography teacher you claimed the earth was flat. Teachers are allowed to say what ever they want when they aren't at work, but they should still be expected the teach the curriculum.
"Experience has proved that some people indeed know everything." -- Russell Baker
