Re: "The Dangers of Creationism in Education" resolution

J. J. Lodder wrote:
Mike Dworetsky <platinum198@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Numerous" <numerous@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:e9hdb3l8trb90l3abt22ns16qut2qg0q07@xxxxxxxxxx

Memorandum from European Center for Law and Justice:


"The Committee on Culture, Science and Education presented the working
document, "Report on the Dangers of Creationism in Education", on 8
June 2007, including 19 articles of a Draft Resolution. The aim of the
Report is to forego scientific discussion between the theories of
evolution and creationism, or intelligent design, to impede the
educational formation of children by restricting classroom exploration
of ideas, and effectively infringe on the rights of free exercise of
expression, religion, and education. The language used in the Report
presents a rather overstated picture of the "threat to human rights"
posed by creationism. Despite citing to a de minimus acceptance of
creationism in Europe, the Report calls for measures to dissuade the
exchange of theories on the origins of life.

[....]

SECTION II. FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION The Report of the Committee on
Culture, Science and Education represents a grave threat to freedom of
expression as enshrined in Article 10 of the Convention; as this
freedom is manifested in academic freedom and in the right to
education in Article 2 of Protocol 1 of the Convention; because the
Report seeks to censor criticism of the theory of evolution and to
eliminate mention of the theory of intelligent design from science
classrooms. The Report, including its Resolution, is a document that
can only work to the detriment of the expressive and educational
climates of the member states."

http://www.aclj.org/media/pdf/ECLJ_MEMO_CoE_Dangers_Creationism_Education_07
052007.pdf

Like ACLJ, ECLJ is a lobbying and pressure group for Christian groups.
There is nothing in the Council of Europe proposals that affect anyone's
right to preach, but it will stop anyone preaching in a science classroom
while pretending it's all about science.

In Europe, 'free' in the context of education
traditionally means the freedom to teach some doctrine in schools.
As opposed to the general state education,
which must of course be tyrannical
by not imposing any doctrine in particular.

So, just the opposite from what a naive American might expect.
To put things in context: in the USA, a school which violated the
constitutional separation of church and state (were that possible)
would be call itself a 'free school',
with this usage of 'free'.

Some years ago, I took part in a university summer program in Scotland, and for part of the time lodged with a public school headmaster and his family. (I learned what 'public' meant there; and was a little surprised.)

The headmaster, a member of the Church of Scotland, explained the concept of freedom to me in the sense used by churches in Scotland. Basically, he said that the longer the denominational name was, and the more it contained variations of the idea of 'freedom' or 'independent', the more likely it was to be markedly repressive to its congregants.

On that basis, it was interesting to read the church names as we drove past. And I, at least, had some fun trying to come up with church names that would indicate, by use of variations on the idea of 'freedom', absolute and total *lack* of freedom for adherents to think for themselves.

Is this related to your observation?

.

Relevant Pages
Loading