Creationist School Board Candidates Near Chicago

In the Daily Herald , a suburban Chicago newspaper with the third-largest circulation in Illinois, we read Candidates: Teach creationism in science classes. Here are some excerpts, with bold added by us:

Two candidates for the Fremont School District 79 board — including the panel’s current president — believe creationism should be taught alongside evolution in science classes. The revelations were made Monday morning during candidate interviews at the Daily Herald’s Lake County office.

How wonderful! Here’s a link to the school board’s web page: Fremont District 79, and there’s also a Wikipedia article on it: Fremont School District 79. Let’s read on:

“I think from a scientific standpoint it can be given as a viewpoint,” board President Sandra Bickley said in the interview. “(It’s) another theory to consider.”

Okay, we know what Sandra thinks. In exchange we reveal what your Curmudgeon thinks: That woman is daft! The news article continues:

Fellow candidate Kim Hansen had a similar take on the controversial topic. “It should be presented in a very broad type of curriculum or structure,” said Hansen, a first-time candidate.

There are two other candidates, but they weren’t interviewed. Here’s more:

The four candidates are running for three seats with 4-year terms. District 79 includes much of Mundelein and some surrounding communities.

We’ve never been to Mundelein, Illinois. It’s about 34 miles from Chicago. We doubt that we’ll ever visit the place because it looks like there are creationists running wild in the streets.

Here’s a bit more from the news article describing the thinking of these two candidates:

Bickley called creationism “one set of theory” and thought it should be taught in science classes as part of a unit, although not necessarily promoted. “It’s something out there,” she said. “I don’t think it’s something that should be ignored.”

She’s right. Creationism is it’s “out there” — far out. And what of the other genius?

Hansen also thought creationism belonged on public-school curriculums. “There is no right or wrong” when it comes to people’s beliefs, she said.

That state’s all messed up anyway, so it probably doesn’t matter if they go officially creationist. Creationism is the least of their problems.

Copyright © 2011. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

11 responses to “Creationist School Board Candidates Near Chicago

  1. There’s no right or wrong when it comes to people’s beliefs? OK, Flying Spagehetti Monster created the universe: one set of theory. Astrology, not astronomy: one set of theory. Demons, not diseases: one set of theory. Aliens from outer space built the pyramids: one set of theory.

  2. “There is no right or wrong” when it comes to people’s beliefs, she said.

    Wow, way to motivate kids to find the answers that they might ask.

    “I want to find out what causes cancer,” says the child.

    Bickley: “There are no right or wrong answers to people’s beliefs, my child. Demons, mutations, hexes from the old witch down the block, it could be any of them.”

    Splendid person to put on the school board.

  3. The main thing that irks me is that they want theology to be discussed in science classes as if it’s just more of the same thing but in a different flavor. What a load of crap! If they want to teach creationism, have a class about world religions and mythology. But to say that religious belief = science is absolute insanity. You would think that candidates for school boards would be people with some education under their belt, but apparently that isn’t required.

  4. There’s no right or wrong when it comes to people’s beliefs?

    Sure, no problem.
    Christianity: wrong.
    Islam: wrong
    Hinduism: wrong
    Judaism: wrong
    Mormonism: not even wrong, wrong.
    Scientology: hell yes, wrong.
    Buddhism: the pure form, right.
    Taoism: yeah, right-ish. OK, right.

    Simple. You gots a supernatural “god” and you are WRONG.

    It’s not a vote. Three billion people believe in BS. Three billion don’t. The first bunch are WRONG. Sorry.

  5. Taoism: yeah, right-ish. OK, right.

    Simple. You gots a supernatural “god” and you are WRONG.

    But deified human beings are “rightish”? I don’t get it.

    My favorite general from “Romance of Three Kingdoms” is worshipped by both police and criminals and shrines to him are found in every police station in Hong Kong.

  6. From that article:

    Guan is revered as “Saintly Emperor Guan” (simplified Chinese: 关圣帝君; traditional Chinese: 關聖帝君; pinyin: Gūanshèngdìjūn) and a leading subduer of demons in Taoism. Taoist worship of Guan Yu began during the Song Dynasty. Legend has it that during the second decade of the 12th century, the saltwater lake in present day Xiezhou County (解州鎮) gradually ceased to yield salt. Emperor Huizong then summoned Celestial Master Zhang Jixian (張繼先), 30th generation descendant of Zhang Daoling, to investigate the cause. The emperor was told that the disruption was the work of Chi You, a deity of war. The Master then recruited the help of Guan, who battled Chi You over the lake and triumphed, whereupon the lake resumed salt production. Emperor Huizong then bestowed upon Guan the title of “Immortal of Chongning” (崇寧真君), formally introducing the latter as a deity into Taoism.

    In early Ming Dynasty, the 42nd Celestial Master Zhang Zhengchang (張正常) recorded the incident in his book Lineage of the Han Celestial Masters (漢天師世家), the first Taoist classic to affirm the legend. Today Taoism practices are predominant in Guan Yu worship. Many temples dedicated to Guan, including the Emperor Guan Temple in Xiezhou County, show heavy Taoist influence. Every year, on the 24th day of the sixth month on the lunar calendar (legendary birthday of Guan Yu, Emperor Guan was actually born on the 22nd day of the sixth month of 160), a street parade in the honor of Emperor Guan would also be held.

    You’re not going to find Reason Enthroned in the non-Western religions.

  7. retiredsciguy

    Regarding creationism: ““It should be presented in a very broad type of curriculum or structure,” said Hansen, a first-time candidate.

    What is this women talking about? What the hell is a “very broad type of curriculum or structure”? I’ve had 27 years of teaching experience and this phrase has no meaning to me.

    She sounds as though she is running for school board as part of an organized effort by creationists to become the voting majority of the local school board. If they are successful, they will need to budget a chunk of change for legal expenses. What a shame that so much money will be diverted from education.

  8. Did I read this right?

    There are four candidates for three positions. Two (at least) of the candidates are creationists. Therefore, at least one creationist will end up on the school board.

    I hope that there are other people being retained on that school board.

  9. @Gabriel Hannah
    “But deified human beings are “rightish”? I don’t get it.”
    Buddhism is not about a deified human, and Taoism even less so. Both are more philosophies than religions, not about worship but instead about perception.

    Spiritual teachings are ineffable and once put into words they invariably become corrupted by misunderstanding and cultural artifacts. This has happened to Buddhism and Taoism in some cases, but not so bad as for the western religions.

  10. This has drifted into a fight over the relative merits of the world’s religions, but the point of the article was that these school board candidates can’t understand the proper domains of religion and science.

    Religion, rightly understood, gives believers moral guidance and narrative meaning, but any particular religion can be misused. The problem here is muddled thinking, a common failing.

  11. There are two other candidates, but they weren’t interviewed.

    Boo! This is the worst form of reporting (theirs, not yours SC). We have what seems like two reasonable candidates for the board and two kooks, so what does the paper do? Interviews the kooks but not the reasonable candidates. No doubt mainstream beliefs don’t bring in the ratings as much as the crazy. Terrible.