One More Reason to Teach Evolution in High School Science Classes

SF Gate
Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 13, 2008

SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal judge says the University of California can deny course credit to applicants from Christian high schools whose textbooks declare the Bible infallible and reject evolution.

Rejecting claims of religious discrimination and stifling of free expression, U.S. District Judge James Otero of Los Angeles said UC's review committees cited legitimate reasons for rejecting the texts - not because they contained religious viewpoints, but because they omitted important topics in science and history and failed to teach critical thinking.


Notice, this is not a decision about Christian schools, or any other kind of school. It is a decision about education. About being ready -- or not ready -- for additional education.

When a prospective student applies to a university for admission, the university wants to know what education the prospect already has. If he or she is missing certain things the university considers important, the prospect may be refused admission. It's generally up to the university to decide what those qualifications are.

They don't want somebody in their math classes who doesn't already understand basic arithmetic or algebra. They probably don't want somebody holding up history classes because he doesn't already have a basic understanding of history. Neither should anybody without a basic understanding of evolution be allowed to attend biology classes. Without evolution, they won't understand it anyway.

Otero also said the Christian schools presented no evidence that the university's decisions were motivated by hostility to religion.

Applicants without the required courses can qualify by taking college preparatory classes or by scoring well in those subjects on the Scholastic Assessment Test, just as anybody else can. How could it be fairer?

The ruling has already been appealed, of course, to try to force UC to admit these particular unqualified students with their impaired education. Charles Robinson, UC's spokesman, said the plaintiffs want a "religious exemption from regular admissions standards." Yep. That's what it sounds like to me.

He continued that the ruling "confirms that UC may apply the same admissions standards to all students and to all high schools without regard to their religious affiliations." And isn't that exactly what they should do? In fact, doesn't the law require them to do that?

There's more, if you want to click the link at the top and read the whole article. Naturally, the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) is already whining that it's a blow to academic freedom: http://www.icr.org/article/4006/ . It is not, of course. It's only a blow to ignorance.