MAYBE EVERYONE knew about this news, but to us it’s an October surprise. We are now predicting a big win for Kathy.
In the Clay Center Dispatch we have two articles on the Kathy Martin race for the Kansas State Board of Education, Sixth District. The first article is about Kathy’s democrat opponent: Renner: Creationism shouldn’t be taught as science. Excerpts, with bold added by us:
Renner said is he opposed to creationism. “I don’t believe the narrow little interpretation of the Bible should be (taught as) science,” he said. “I was raised as a Roman Catholic on a very different side of the coin. When it comes to evolution and Catechism, they’re two separate issues, that’s how I was raised.”
Martin’s support of intelligent design in 2005 “was a great black eye to Kansas” and irreparably damaged Kansas at time when the state was attempting to recruit bio-tech industries.
Fine. But then there’s sex education. We’ve mentioned that Renner and Kathy have different positions, but we’ve never paid any attention to what they were. Therefore we were surprised to read this, which we consider the October surprise:
Renner stated in a May campaign letter that he is an openly gay man running for office. He was chairman of the Kansas Equality Coalition of the Flint Hills, a LGBT affiliated organization, and testified in front of the Kansas House Federal and State Affairs Committee in 2005 against the amendment to the Kansas Constitution banning gay marriage. Teaching human sexuality includes some information on other preferences, Renner said.
We don’t know anything about the prevailing attitudes in Kansas, but we can guess. It looks like we’ll be blogging about Kansas creationism for years to come.
The second article in the same paper is about Kathy: Martin: Many BOE issues being ignored.
On science standards, Martin said she isn’t for Creationism or Intelligent Design or against evolution.
As always, we just don’t believe these people. Here’s more:
“Scientific evidence, whether it refutes or supports evolution, ought to be discussed in the science classroom. Evolution, especially the macro kind of evolution is a historical type of science, not empirical type of science that can be proven, replicated, duplicated or observed in a laboratory. …
Micro evolution, but not macro evolution. She believes in individual stairs, but not the whole staircase. Here’s more:
“I do not, big letters, do not want to teach Creationism in the science classroom,” she said. “The reporters continually say those things and that is not true. All I’ve asked for, and the other members of the state board of education that approved the science standards in 2005 is an open, objective presentation of evolution,” she said. “Science versus science, it’s never been science versus religion. Science will lose out if it versus religion.“
What is this woman babbling about? Doesn’t matter. She’ll going to get re-elected. One final excerpt:
As far as changing science standards, Martin said she thinks it’s appropriate to consider that again when the standards are up for review in 2010.
Great. Kansas will then go back to authorizing supernatural science in the schools.