Ronald Reagan library -- Rants and Raves: Classic Edition

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Friday, May 08, 10:32:04am [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, October 30, 06:53:37pm
Author:

Msnemesis
Subject: Ronald Reagan library

Only contains crap.

President Ronald Reagan

During Reagan's 1967-1975 California governorship, the "state board of education had pushed to weaken the teaching of evolution and endorsed creationism" (Mooney, 2005, p. 36). A Science magazine editorial opined that

Reagan's sympathy with the creationists was common knowledge when he was governor. Reagan supported an unsuccessful 1972 suit brought by the state school board . . . to bring the teaching of creationism to public schools (Science, 1980, p. 1214).

During a 1980 press conference, presidential candidate Ronald Reagan was asked if he thought the theory of evolution should be taught in public schools. He answered that evolution is a

theory only, and it has in recent years been challenged in the world of science and is not yet believed in the scientific community to be as infallible as it once was believed. But if it was going to be taught in the schools, then I think that also the biblical theory of creation, which is not a theory but the biblical story of creation, should also be taught (Science, 1980, p. 1214).

Asked if he personally accepted the theory of evolution, Reagan replied: "I have a great many questions about it. I think that recent discoveries down through the years have pointed up great flaws in it" (Science, 1980, p. 1214).

After Reagan's election, several key administration members also supported teaching creation. Due to the opposition of mainline science to anything less than dogmatic teaching of Darwinism, though, they had to be circumspect. For example, Reagan's science adviser, George Keyworth, "refused to repudiate the teaching of creationism in public schools during his 1981 confirmation hearing." Reagan's Secretary of Education, William Bennett, also supported teaching of creationism. For example, in 1986 Bennett "declared that in his view, the selection of public school textbooks should involve the `judgment of the community,' a tacit nod to creationist forces at the local level" (Mooney, 2005, p. 36).

Mooney concludes that "The Reagan administration's sympathies with creationism signaled a new development for the Republican Party and conservatism more generally" (2005, p. 36). Reagan also wrote in a letter to a correspondent that certain quotes, evidently made in response to statements made by Paul Kurtz in The Humanist, that

Humanism can not in any fair sense of the word apply to one who still believes in God as the source and creator of the universe. Christian Humanism would be possible only for those who are willing to admit that they are atheistic Humanists. It surely does not apply to God intoxicated believers (Skinner, et al., 2003, p. 644).

Reagan then expressed his concern about teaching Humanism in public schools by paraphrasing John J. Dunphy from the Humanist magazine who wrote that "the battle for humankind's future will be waged and won in the public school classroom and the new faith of Humanism will replace the `rotting corpse of Christianity'." (Skinner, et al., 2003, p. 644). Some of Reagan's cabinet members also supported Reagan's view. For example, Reagan's Secretary of the Interior, James Watt, said that the issue in the Scopes trial

was not whether the doctrine of evolution should take the place of the Biblical account of Creation. The question was whether the theory of evolution could be discussed. . . . Scopes lost the trial. . . . Censorship was as wrong then as it is now. We believers in the Old Testament want the theories of both evolution and Creation taught. . . . Unfortunately, in many school systems, the liberals have now censored the teaching of Creation. Yet is censorship by liberals right and by conservatives wrong? (1985, pp. 109-110).

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]