Thoughts in a Haystack

According to OneNewsNow, an arm of the American Family News Network, "a Christian news service," the pending Tennessee "academic freedom" bill "enables teachers and students to debate creation and intelligent design when it comes up in the classroom."

Sen. Bo Watson (R-Hixson), says SB 893 encourages the discussion of challenges to current scientific thought, such as global warming and the theory of evolution. It does not, however, replace the state-approved curriculum for science classes or mandate the teaching of creation science.

"It makes the small caveat that says ... teachers should be comfortable having these discussions, but they need to be sure that they are directing the discussions back towards the curriculum established by the state board of education," Watson details.

The lawmaker says he does not know of any specific incidents in the past in which Tennessee teachers have had problems discussing creation and intelligent design when students asked.

"But there has been a[n] underlying tone that when these issues come up in the classroom, where students are challenging conventional scientific theories, that teachers aren't really sure how to respond to that," the senator explains.

Why is this law necessary or even useful if even the sponsor doesn't know of a problem that it addresses?

More importantly, why does the law say that:

Neither the state board of education, nor any public elementary or secondary school governing authority, director of schools, school system administrator, or any public elementary or secondary school principal or administrator shall prohibit any teacher in a public school system of this state from helping students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught.

This section only protects the teaching of scientific information ...

... if the sole intent is let teachers be comfortable discussing creation and intelligent design when students ask? The law is clearly aimed at permitting the teachers to initiate the so-called analysis, critique and review of alleged scientific strengths and weaknesses which, of course, means they would be directing the discussion away from, instead of back to, the curriculum established by the state board of education.

I've said it before: given how much they lie, why are creationists so bad at it?
.