Bringing Creationsim Into The Science Classroom

This blog post by a Penn State educated Professor of Biological Anthropology at the University of Rhode Island really intrigued me. Holly Dunsworth, the professor, is proposing teaching about creationism in her biological anthropology class. Before I get into my thoughts, here's a bit of where she is coming from:

See, those of us who teach from an epistemological perspective try our best to convey to students not just what we know but more importantly how we know what we know. This is an eye-opening and empowering way to learn which is why we try to create this experience for students. The only way to do that is to teach about evolution now--how scientists have come to understand it--compared to how people used to explain the natural world, which greatly influenced unscientific beliefs about nature that people still hold today. This epistemological approach means that we strive for a non-dogmatic and non-indoctrinating presentation of the material, upholding prized scientific ideals that aren't shared by many of those who support creationism. 

Dunsworth is suggesting using the whole history of humans' attempts to understand and explain the natural world to show how we got to where we are today in terms of scientific evolutionary theory. Without being insulting to the Bible as religious text, the story of creation can be used to show the evolution of evolutionary science. Here's Dunsworth again:

But given all those scientific theories, creation theory is the most effective way to put evolution in scientific context. It's a perfect foil for evolution, illuminating the scientific nature of evolutionary theory by demonstrating what science is not and what the scientific method cannot address.

This is a large part of what drew me to anthropology classes in college. Science to me is a whole lot more interesting, and valuable, when looked at in a human context. The biological anthropologist is not only interested in understanding what made us who we are, but how we as a society and as a species have come to understand and deal with the gaining of that understanding. History, religion, psychology and genetics all tell a story, and using all of them together makes that story much richer.

I respect the biologist who stands on his science, with genome models and  DNA strands and genetic drift and mutation, to understand the world around him. I also respect the theologian who stands on his religion, with the bible and faith and centuries of tradition and philosophy, to understand the world around him. But I try to follow a path both between and amongst the two. I don't think religion means much if you don't try your best to understand the facts of the world we all inhabit. I think understanding the world as it is brings us closer to appreciating the enormity of God's gift to us. I also believe science is empty if you limit your thinking to what you are capable of seeing and measuring and grasping with our technology and methods as they stand today. Appreciating that there is always more that we don't understand than that which we do is at the very heart of the scientific method at its best.

For me, anthropology helps us to walk that line between thought and belief. It helps us to see as much of the world as we can and to appreciate it in the context of our human experience. I am really happy to see someone like Holly Dunsworth teaching young people. I hope she is the inspiration to them that my professors were to me.

We Are Having The Wrong Argument

It has been a huge mistake, and a missed opportunity, for the Republican Party, and the Right in general, to allow this kerfuffle over who is going to pay for women's contraceptives to become a First Amendment issue. The White House targeted religious affiliated organizations for a reason. They want this fight right now to be over religion and thus over the morality of contraception. I've been going nuts listening to people on "my side" fall right into the trap. It's been easy to do. It is very true that the First Amendment protects churches from government interference, and thus under the First Amendment the mandate that Catholic charities pay for their employees' contraception and abortion is plainly unconstitutional. But by using that argument, we are surrendering our Constitutional government. Even if we win that battle, we lose a big piece of the war over the proper role of the federal government.

There is no authority vested in Congress to force anyone or any business to cover any medical expense, through insurance or otherwise. Article One Section 8 of the United States Constitution  gives the Congress certain powers, and this isn't one of them. When we argue that this part of Obama Care is wrong because it forces religious groups to pay for procedures and medications they disagree with, we are stipulating that it is just fine for the federal government to force any non-religious business to pay for the same thing or anything else, and it is not. It is not wrong because it is a religious organization being forced to buy it and it is not wrong because it is contraception or abortion that is being covered, it's wrong because there is no Constitutional authority for the federal government to tell anyone they must purchase anything for anybody. It's not a religious issue or a women's health issue, it's a freedom issue.

We as conservatives should have seen this and not let the argument go down the path it has taken. If we are going to see an end to the Obama administration, we are going to need to be seen as the pro-freedom party, not the anti-contraception party or the anti-women's health party. It's very unfortunate that the morality of contraception and abortion fits so nicely into Rick Santorum's political personality. I personally disagree with him on a lot of these social issues, but I do very much respect him for saying unequivocally what he believes and sticking with it. I do, however, think that his nomination, if not his continued prominence in the race for the nomination, will all but guarantee a second Obama term.

It's driving me batty that as the federal government is taking control of more and more of our everyday lives, we are being drawn into an argument over whether it's moral to take birth control pills. It's like we are aboard a sinking ship and instead of finding a competent captain to take over, we are complaining that the scrambled eggs on the buffet are cold.  It's a distraction, and a very dangerous one.

Instead of lecturing women on the morality of reproductive rights, we should be pointing out to them that the government that is given responsibility for paying for their reproductive decisions, also has the power to control their reproductive decisions. Nothing is free.

In Defense of Vulture Capitalism

Living just above the Great State of South Carolina, we are treated to the radio ads that have saturated their airwaves in the weeks leading up to tomorrow's primary. I understand it's a primary, a contest between Republicans, as as such they will necessarily criticize each other and each other's policies in their ads. I do wish, however, that Republicans would find a way to do so without resorting to lowest common denominator, populist stupidity. The attacks on Herman Cain's 9-9-9 tax plan were ridiculous. Cain remains the only contender for president with a real, honest plan to tackle the county's broken tax system. What did that get him? The other Republicans attacked the plan for being hard on the working class, unworkable and too complicated. Michelle Bachman went so far as to insinuate it was the work of Satan, which said a lot more about the woman's mental capacity than about the 9-9-9 Plan. That is exactly, with the possible exception of Bachman's nuttiness, what one would expect the Democrats and the press to say about Cain and his plan. With no serious proposals of their own, the other Republicans are basically saying the present system is better, that it isn't already everything they claimed 9-9-9 would be--complicated, unworkable and a drain on capital. With that attitude, we as Republicans deserve to lose.

Now the field has narrowed and, for the moment at least, Mitt Romney is seen as the one to beat. Are his primary opponents attacking him for not being conservative enough, for creating a state-run health care system, for being wishy-washy in his defense of his ideas? Well, to be honest, they are a bit, but the one ad that has been running over and over again attacks Romney for being a "vulture capitalist." Once again, Republicans have resorted to liberal arguments against a fellow conservative. The ad distorts and demagogues the role played in our free market economy by venture capital firms. It's playing on the woeful state of most Americans' economic literacy, and that is more than sad, it's a crime. This country will only survive if we as Republicans and conservatives and libertarians can educate the vast majority of Americans with an understanding of markets and private enterprise and the role of risk-taking and reward. It's going to be an uphill battle, and when the very people in the best position to push us forward are dragging us back, it scares the Hell out of me for the future.

We Are..... the 1%

Well, reading the fine print, not quite, but definitely the 2% and moving up. I'm talking world-wide, which, if you think about it, is better for the ego. I mean, wouldn't you rather be at the top of the world than the top of just one country? Hooray for us!

This bit of ego boosting comes courtesy of the Huffington Post, whose article on the subject for some reason does not find this to be a reason to celebrate. Here is their description of the news from an economist's book:

According to calculations by World Bank economist Branko Milanovic in his book The Haves and the Have-Nots, about half of the world's richest one percent live in the United States, about 29 million of them, to be exact.
But the qualifications to make the cut may surprise some people who've never considered themselves part of the world's financial elite.
According to CNN Money, who reported on Milanovic's findings, an individual with an after-tax salary of just $34,000 per year ranks among the richest one percent in the world. A family of four, Milanovic says, would have to make $136,000 in order to qualify.

So it's after-tax income, and our household's needs to be divided by three rather than just two, but still, we are very much knocking on the door to Lifestyles of the Worlds' Rich and Famous. I gave this news to my wife this morning and she reported back that she didn't feel rich. That's the point, I think. Rich, well-to-do, elite, these are all very subjective terms and depend entirely on perspective. My wife works 40 hours a week as a municipal clerk, she's married to a middle manager in a route sales company, she lives in what to her seems a medium sized house in a middle-class neighborhood. We own one small SUV, bought used. We watch our money so we can take some trips and eat out when we want. Nothing extravagant. At least not in our terms, American terms.

Certainly the kids of the Occupy movement don't consider themselves rich or elite. They express disdain and even loathing for the rich elites. They believe the 1% should be giving up more of what they have to share with the other 99% who weren't born into a world of luxury and privilege. But these kids have clothes and food and tents and laptops and cell phones and backpacks and eyeglasses and blankets and frisbees and drums. They are literate and healthy and have an abundance of free time. To 99% of the world, the Occupiers ARE the 1%.

I could go on and on about the Occupy movement and it's hypocrisy and stupidity, but that's for another post. My point isn't that the Occupiers, or my wife, are ungrateful and greedy and should be sending half of what they make to sub-saharan African. That wouldn't work, as the reason sub-saharan Africa isn't home to it's share of the 1% is that it doesn't share the values and freedoms and laws and political culture of the United States or Germany or Japan. Much of the world is like a bucket with a hole in it, you can fill it with water, but it will always run out in a very short time until you plug the hole.

We don't owe the rest of the world our wealth, though we do have a moral and ethical obligation to keep as many people as comfortable and free as we reasonably can. We do have an obligation to support in other places the things that made the wealth of America possible. Economic freedom, individual rights, property rights, the rule of law and a moral underpinning based on the Golden Rule will do more than any amount of money to raise the standards of living for the "other 99%." Sadly, it's these things that the Occupiers seem to be railing most loudly against.

2012 Is Going To Be A Fun Year In NC Politics

It's only the fifth day of the new year, and already the General Assembly in Raleigh is entertaining. The wailing and gnashing of teeth coming from the democrat representatives is awesome to behold. This article in the Greensboro News and Record does a great job of explaining what happened and features some great gnashing of teeth quotes.

The long and short of it is this. The General Assembly was called back into session because the governor vetoed the Racial Justice Act. Failing to over-ride that, the Republicans took the house out of session and then back into session at zero-dark-thirty last night to over-ride the governor's veto of another bill. In this they were successful. This new law, which also passed the senate, will stop the state from automatically deducting dues for the North Carolina Education Association from teachers' paychecks. The NCEA will have to collect it's dues from it's membership all by itself. Democrats find this highly disturbing.

You see, the NCEA spent a good part of those dues last year trying to defeat Republicans, and also targeting any Democrats that fell out of step with the party line. Make no mistake, this was a political move on the part of the Republicans. They are trying to defund a part of the Democrat election machine, but the opposition to it from Democrats is just as partisan. They will claim this is an attack on education, on teachers and on the American Way, but really they worry that teachers may not be as willing to pony up dues money if they have to write the checks themselves, and that will lead to an emptier Democrat war chest come election time.

Whatever the motive, in my opinion this is a great idea from the Republicans. If the NCEA serves it's members well, they will pay dues. If not, they won't. That's the way it should work.

I'm Baaaaaack.....

Funny how something that becomes a habit can just as quickly be forgotten. That's sort of what happened with this blog. I enjoyed it for a while, then slowed down, then stopped altogether. I think it's time to try getting back into the habit of writing regularly, and this was fun once, so I am going to try and see if I can get back into some sort of groove. This was, and will remain, a politcally-centered blog, with occasional digressions into my other interests. If this becomes fun again, I have an idea for a second blog, so we'll just have to see what happens.

I figured today was as good a day as any to start blathering about presidential politics. The Iowa Caucuses are going down this evening and surely by tomorrow morning the political landscape will have changed somewhat. Again. See, that's what has me less than enthused about the whole field of Republican contenders so far. Not only do none of them light any sort of fire in me, but I feel completely disconnected from the process because our primary here in North Carolina isn't until May, and things may be decided by then. Or not. I just am finding it hard to become excited. I'd love to see the White House in the hands of someone other than Barack Obama, but my gut just can't see that happening, no matter who his opponent turns out to be.

I will remain involved as much as I can and do all I can to help those I agree with, or seem to agree with,  achieve office. Locally, I am lucky to be represented by a great state representative and state senator, and I will work hard to see those two men returned to Raleigh. I have high hopes that North Carolina will have a good Republican governor next year and that some much needed changes can be made in our state. I'm a firm believer that the closer a government is to you, the more effect it has on your life, so if I can get good local and state government, I'm much less worried about what happens on the national level. That's my theory today,m anyhow, we'll see how it works out.

Believe

I heard that one word being used to promote the Polar Express movie on television and it got me to thinking. Belief is what this whole season is about. The birth of Christ, Santa Clause, keeping close to family, sharing time with friends--they all come back to believing.

Christ's birth is the "reason for the season" for sure. But what we are celebrating is really a belief in that event, and what it means for mankind. It's more often called Faith, but Christian creeds repeat the phrase "we believe." We believe in the impossible. Virgins do not give birth to children. Men do not rise from the grave three days after their death. The spirits of the departed do not talk to their friends. But we as Christians make a conscious choice to believe these things happened. We can't prove it, and that's important, because if we could we wouldn't need faith, our belief would be meaningless. And Christmas would be just another birthday.

There are those who see Santa Claus and the traditions and, yes, commercialism, that surround him as taking something away from the "true meaning" of Christmas. I disagree. Santa Claus is the personification of all that is good and charitable and joyful in the human race. No one lives at the North Pole. Sleighs don't fly and fat men don't magically transport down chimneys. But that doesn't mean Santa isn't real. As Virginia read in response to her question to The New York Sun...

Yes, VIRGINIA, there is a Santa Claus. He exists as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist...

We can't touch love or generosity, just as we can't prove the virgin birth, but they are real things, and made more real by our belief in them. And Santa Claus helps that along.

Christmas is also the time for family and friends. Reading a friend's facebook post about missing his dad at Christmas, and his friend's kind response to him made me realize belief plays a major role here too at Christmastime.  While I was growing up, my grandmother spent every Christmas with us. She'd come the night before and wake with us on Christmas morning and share in the opening of presents and all the fun. She passed away years ago, but that doesn't mean she's gone. I can no longer see her or hear her voice or give her a hug, but I know she's there with me and all my family as we share Christmas together. It's yet another impossibility that belief makes as real as the floor under my feet.


Our friends can also teach us about believing. I've found that some friend is always there when you need one. They often don't need to be called upon and many times have no idea that I needed help or even that anything was wrong. Twain wrote that a true friend is one who carries light into your darkness, and that we never forget these people. He's right, and I've learned to believe that they will always be there. You can't touch a frinedship, and I challenge anyone to write even a decent definition of the word, but it's real and it's part of what makes Christmas magic.


In The Polar Express the belief in Santa is represented by the sound of a bell that only those who believe can hear. Hearing that bell, being able to believe, into adulthood requires a conscious act of faith, of belief in the impossible. It requires not an ignorance of all the hate and pain and sadness in the world, but a belief that nothing bad lasts forever. Jesus really was born of a virgin and died only to rise again and show us the way to Heaven. Santa Claus is just as real as love itself. Our loved ones that have passed out of our reach will live forever in those of us they touched. Our friends will help us when we need it and fill our lives with joy. Love is stronger than hate. Forgiveness is stronger than hurt. Joy will always conquer pain.

I believe these things because I chose to believe them. For me, they are real and they make Christmas perfect, because I BELIEVE.

Believe.

Merry Christmas.

Understanding What Tomorrow Is Really About, From A Brit

Janet Daley, of Britain's Telegraph newspaper, visited the United States recently and brought back a better understanding of the Tea Party movement, and what it means to the future of the country and the Republican party, than I've read in any American press. Here's her take what she learned from her GOP friends...

My Republican friends, perhaps surprisingly, were not gloating. They were too furious. But contrary to the superficial British assumption (heavily promoted by the BBC), they were not devoting their excoriation exclusively to the Obama Administration – or even to its clique of Congressional henchmen, led by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. That they were opposed to the Big State, European social democratic model of government which Obama had imported to Washington went almost without saying. But they were at least as angry with the leadership of their own party for having conceded far too much of the argument. 

Miss Daley hits the nail on the head. Tomorrow's elections are not about Democrats versus Republicans, they aren't even about what we have come to think of recently as liberal versus conservative. Tomorrow's elections are about restoring the principles that made the United States of America unique among the nations of the world. It's more about the state versus the individual than anything else.

Again, the Brit gets it...

What the grassroots rebellion is really about is an attempt to pull the Republican party back to its basic philosophy of low-tax, low-spend, small government: the great Jeffersonian principle that the best government is that which governs least.

Jeffersonian ideals, and a return to Jeffersonian democracy, are inspiring more of the Tea Partiers than perhaps even they know. And Thomas Jefferson was a Democrat.

Operation Salsa Drop

Flamin' Amy's Burrito Barn, clearly the awesomest restaurant in all of southeastern North Carolina, is offering some of their salsas for sale. The proceeds go towards sending jars of salsa to our troops overseas. You buy a jar, a soldier gets a jar. It's a total win-win.

Please check them out.


Operation Salsa Drop

A Good Use of Government Money, Finally

With the assistance of a $2 million grant, the University of Virginia is putting the entire papers of several founders online in a searchable database. I can't wait for 2012!