Can't Vote for the Ontario PC's this time: Evolutionary Update
I've been a staunch Ontario PC since I started voting 20 years ago.
For the longest time, I was gaining respect and confidence in John Tory and was looking forward to voting PC in the coming election to get rid of McGuinty and the Liberal Party.
All that changed when John Tory's promised full funding for Faith based school's. I've had serious reservations about such a proposal and hearing today that creationism can be taught in school is just confirmed my worst fears. Religious teaching's belong in church and at home not in schools. Creationism is based on religious dogma, not science. Evolution is not perfect, but it is science and should be taught in school. Besides creationism and evolution don't even address the same topic. There are other theories that address the begins of life on Earth. Evolution is about how life changes in response to it's environment. Anyways, I digress.
I'm sad to say that this will be one of the first times that I an not voting for a PC candidate. I will suffer through 4 more years of McGuinty to make sure John Tory doesn't become premier.
Update:
Christian Conservative stated that in the comments that "As for evolution, it's simply not taught at all... in order to have a good grasp on science, you DON'T need to be taught evolution... it is also a religious dogma, but of a humanistic nature.
Bottom line is that faith-based schools, for the most part, stick to the Provincial curriculum already"
Except the provincial curriculum includes evolution as part of biology. My fear is that if Tory allows Creationism to be taught within Faith based schools, how long will it be before it's demanded within the public school system or as an acceptable replacement within science. ( Don't think it won't be, it's been a discussion point in the US for sometime now ). I sure there are other aspects of religion that some think should be taught in all schools.
For those that think the Creationism will be taught as part of a religion course, think again. Here is a small example, but I think you'll find many that think it falls under science and "Creation Science" Creationists contend that it is actually we who are standing on the side of science, against religious beliefs that would hold us back.
Evolution is a part of science of biology as it should be. It is both "fact" and "theory".
Full funding for faith based schooling is a slippery slope that we shouldn't go down.
Don't get me wrong, the ideals that religion purports is both noble and worth aspiring to, for me the problem arises when the literal interpretation of the bible is presented as a matter of historical or scientific fact when it in no way is either.
44 comments:
I'm with you 100%. I am thoroughly disappointed with his comments today.
I hate the Liberals, but there is no way I can vote for Tory.
Gravity is just a theory too, maybe they should teach children that God keeps us from flying off the earth with invisible fingers.
The media is spinning this against the PCs as usual.
What Tory was pointing out was that currently, these schools already teach creationism.
Under his proposal, if the school wants public funds they would have to teach evolution and creationism would become part of the religion class.
I think this will go over like a lead balloon with both sides.
Four more years of McGuinty. *Sigh*
I'm sorry to hear you feel this way. One may not believe in a higher power - in a democracy, that is fine - one may believe that evolution is the only possible explanation for our being here - in a democracy, that is fine - what I disagree with is the refusal to permit parents, who don't support this secular only path, their democratic right to raise their children and educate their children as they feel is proper. We constantly critize our leaders for their "my way or the highway" attitudes and it looks like it has trickled down to many who oppose funding these schools. An open, inclusive education system where we discuss and debate all manner of ideas and opinions is preferable to one where you get spoon fed the bureaucraticly approved dogma to the exclusion of all else. If we keep excluding these groups from society, if they don't have a place in our systems, if we don't permit them a voice, how can we be surprised if they turn on us or react in ways outside our norms? It took courage to stand up and say funding is a matter of equality and fairness and I will be supporting Mr Tory and his party. I wish you well in you choice and am glad that matters of this nature in this country can be discussed an decided upon in this free, open and safe way.
As much as 4 more years of McGuinty would taste like crap, I'd rather have that then creationism being taught in school.
cool blue, I don't think creationism is part of the Ontario Curriculum. I believe learning about world religion is allowed and I think important, but learning religious dogma like creationism isn't. I'll have to verify with my father-in-law would was a superintendent of schools.
I may just, gulp, vote green or ndp , just so I don't have to vote Liberal either. It will depend on the candidate.
"An open, inclusive education system where we discuss and debate all manner of ideas" sorry but creationism is about religious dogma. It isn't based on scientific research , it based on faith. It isn't science and doesn't belong in school as some would have. It belongs in church or at home, but not in publicly funded institutions of learning.
I was taught both the theory of evolution and creationism at a Catholic school on the public dime. If there was no proposal to launch a commission to investigate ways to fund fb schools, would it also be a deal breaker for you if abolishing funding to Catholic schools wasn't explicitly in the platform?
Because if you could vote for the PC Party under that scenario, I think your announcement that you cannot vote for them now is nothing more than showboating.
Matt, were you taught creationism in science class?
Anyway, I am completely against using my tax dollars to support Catholic schools along with Jewish schools and especially Muslim schools.
Then when you fill our your tax forms, put your checkmark beside the public school when asked which board you wish to receive your tax money.
I think both pro and anti creationists will agree there is nothing scientific about it, so no, I was not taught it in science class, nor is that what John Tory has proposed.
Creationism isn't taught per say, however, religion classes often are offered, especially in the publicly funded catholic system.
What Tory is proposing is that creationism be dealt with in the religion class, not the science class.
Cool Blue:
You are correct in what Tory is proposing (allowing creationism in religion class) but you are incorrect that religion classes are "offered". Unless it's changed since I graduated from OAC 7 or so years ago, students had to take one religion class for every year of highschool completed or they were unable to receive a diploma.
Matt,
I would assume that in CATHOLIC schools that religion classes would be required.
However, in public schools they are not mandatory and some schools offer religious studies (often like "World religions" or "comparative religions").
Ah, my mistake, I thought you were talking about the Catholic board.
So public schools do offer religion classes? I wasn't aware of that. Is it more of a general "world religions" class or are there classes on Catholicism, Hindu studies, etc.? And do they all offer religion classes or is it up to individual schools/district boards?
Public schools sometimes offer religious studies but its up to the school. They're usually general "world religion" classes.
I didn't go to a Catholic school, but given that the Catholic church is not Creationist I highly doubt that it was taught there.
Creationism is more than the belief that God is responsible for creating the universe. It is a literal reading of the book of Genesis; among other things, it requires a belief that life on Earth began only 6000 years ago. It contradicts not just biological evolution, but physics, chemistry, and geology. There's absolutely no excuse for using public money to mis-educate students in this manner.
If the school is private, then they should be able to teach whatever they like, as long as it's not criminal and the school teaches the provincial curriculum as well.
Whether that should be publicly funded is another story. So let's be true conservatives and agree with Tory, then we can debate the merits of publicly funding private schools. Finally, we can send our own children to schools that do not teach intelligent design, if we so choose.
Then we will be true conservatives.
Yeah...I say let's vote for that lying piece of shit McGuinty instead.
Who gives a rat's ass about whether the study of Creationsm will be allowed?
Everyone knows our teacher's will be busy teaching whatever they want.
Sean, the whole issue is that teaching creation shouldn't be publicly funded. That is what most of this is about.
Anon, I care.
I wrote a piece: John Tory committed political suicide.
Adam,
The definition of creationism depends on what your personal interpretation is.
Some people will say as you do that creationism is the literal interpretation in the story of Genesis; however, many people believe that Intelligent Design, is a form of creationism.
At the other end of the spectrum, some would say that anybody who believes that God, or any other being(s) created the universe, is creationism.
"I was not taught it in science class, nor is that what John Tory has proposed." That may not be what's proposed but that's what creationists want.
They keep using words like "It's just a theory" or "there are other theories". Evolution is based on scientific observation, the collection of empirical data in order to explain it. Creationism is based solely of biblical teaching which is not scientific at all. It's not an alternate theory as some would have us think and it doesn't belong in publicly funded schools.
If you want to teach in your own time then by all means.
There's other religious doctrine that would have us believe that women are somehow inferior to men but no one would suggest that we teach that at school, now would we.
Who cares what they call it? In physics class we were taught the "theory of gravity", but I haven't witnessed any of my possessions levitating recently.
Creationism is taught in religion class, and evolution is taught in science. that's what is currently done in PF Catholic schools, and thats the middle ground Tory is going for other fb schools
Cool Blue:
The definition of every word depends on what your personal interpretation is. Most words have a very common interpretation. "Creationism" refers almost exclusively to the rejection of evolution (among other things).
The version of Intelligent Design being trumpeted across North America is Creationism; it's just a little easier on the Genesis aspect. By and large its proponents are biblical literalists as well, they're just quiet about it.
If you want to pick at the definition of 'creationism' and say that it means something innocuous like "God created the universe", why participate in this discussion? That's not what the controversy is about.
For the record, all of you have it all COMPLETELY WRONG, and so does Tory. As a former faith-based school student, I can vouch for the fact that "creationism" isn't really dealt with at all in most schools, and if it is, it's dealt with in religion classes.
As for evolution, it's simply not taught at all... in order to have a good grasp on science, you DON'T need to be taught evolution... it is also a religious dogma, but of a humanistic nature.
Bottom line is that faith-based schools, for the most part, stick to the Provincial curriculum already... they just teach it from a more balanced perspective by leaving out the overly humanistic dogmas such as evolution that AREN'T necessary.
I think it is utterly irresponsible for a school, of any kind, not to forward the theory of evolution to students. In fact it sounds downright dogmatic.
I'm not sure where Christian Conservative is coming from.
It is not possble to teach biology without the theory of evolution which is the fundamental organizing principle of the science. Essentially, if you don't teach evolution, you aren't teaching biology.
I think it's time to take the long vision for the Conservative Party in Ontario - Tory could ruin it for decades and perhaps it's just not the time.
Next time - with a better leader. You don't want to leave a disaster situation for the Party for short gain.
No John Tory for this gal.
This is what I hate about modern politics. People think in sound bites from the media without engaging their own minds.
I reacted the same way as everybody else here over this whole "Creationism" BS media scoop when I first heard how the G&M and CTV spun it. Then I read between the lines and thought it over for myself and realized that what Tory said wasn't what the Liberals/media painted it as (which was later confirmed when John Tory came out swinging against this spin).
Tory's plan is that, in order to get public funding, the faith-based schools have to adopt the Ontario curriculum. The Ontario science curriculum teaches Evolution. Thus, faith-based schools that do not teach Evolution would have to do so in order to get funding. And Creationism is not part of the Ontario science curriculum, so it could not be taught as science, only as religion.
Thus, if you look at it in the correct, non-media selling point spin version...
Presently you have -
a) Public Schools: evolution only
b) some faith based: creationism only
Under Tory's plan -
a) Public Schools: evolution only
b) same faith based: creationism as religious studies, Evolution under Ontario science curriculum
If you look at it, Tory's plan doesn't increase the number of schools teaching Creationism. It increases the number of schools teaching Evolution.
A full 180 degrees from how the Liberals and the media are spinning this.
Come on... use your own brains peoples. The first thing that should have been a search-beam light of obviousness as to how this is pure spin is the fact that none of these stories about the "Creationism" angle actually tell you what Tory said. They don't tell you whether he was responding to a question about how "Creationism" is taught in some faith based schools or whether Tory brought it up on his own (the fact that they don't say Tory brought it up as part of a speech speaks volumes, doesn't it?).
Engage the brain folks.
Creationism is taught in religion class, and evolution is taught in science. that's what is currently done in PF Catholic schools, and thats the middle ground Tory is going for other fb schools
I think what John Tory is trying to say (and not doing a very good job of it), is that Faith-based schools receiving public funding would still be allowed to teach Creationism in their religious classes, as I assume some may be doing now.
Evolution, if it is indeed part of the science curriculum would have to be taught as well.
John Tory's main problem is that he has some lousy advisers and communicators.
KC said in her update, "My fear is that if Tory allows Creationism to be taught within Faith based schools, how long will it be before it's demanded within the public school system or as an acceptable replacement within science."
The catholic school boards have been in Ontario for decades. Do you have any proof that those boards are trying to dictate what is taught in the Public board's compulsary courses that would back up your slippery slope fallacy?
Exactly, John. The Separate School system's existence itself offers decades of proof that this just plain ain't-gonna-happen.
As for Joanne's assertion that Tory has lousy advisers/communicators? Well, that could be. But a good spinster (hello Michael Moore?) can take any segment of what somebody says and spin it 180 degress in the opposite direction. It doesn't mean the advisers/communicators were bad. It means the spinster was THAT good.
And since this whole Creationism thing was first shouted out by the Liberal party (not the media), you have to take it with a grain of salt. It seems a lot of people buying into this spin have been taking it with a teaspoon of sugar instead.
"KC said in her update" first off it's in "his" update...this is probably the first time since I've been voting that a leader of a political party has proposed the creationism be allowed to be taught along side evolution is schools that are publicly funded.
And before you say anything, Tory brought it up and only clarified afterwards because it was a huge faux pas.
surecure,
Sure it's not in the current curriculum, but who sets the curriculum?
"And since this whole Creationism thing was first shouted out by the Liberal party (not the media)" Actually it was shouted out by John Tory first.
Tory said..."They teach evolution in the Ontario curriculum, but they also could teach the fact to the children that there are other theories that people have out there that are part of some Christian beliefs." to me that denotes along side evolution.
Do any you remember the continuing battle going on the US of people trying to get evolution stricken from the curriculum and inserting creationism?
Example: Kansas
How long before it would happen here?
"Actually it was shouted out by John Tory first."
Great... semantics. The height of intelligent debate (*rolls his eyes*)
Shouted out... as in shouted to the heavens... as in advertised in great abundance... as in made to be a top issue of the campaign.
Are you telling me John Tory was the one who shouted this out? I first heard about it in the G&M as something the Liberals were loudly criticizing, not as part of a news release by Tory himself (as you claim). And as I said before, the way the articles about this Creationism scare are worded, it sounds like Tory was responding to a question in the middle of some stop, not shouting it out as a new, major part of a campaign platform.
But if you can show where it was Tory who was presenting the idea of Creationism having any degree of equal weight as Evolution as plank of the PC platform -- and not as a response to a question as it obviously appears -- I'll be glad to agree with you.
"...to me that denotes along side evolution."
So, you're saying that the Ontario School board is going to be overtaken by a great conspiracy to teach Creationism alongside Evolution or maybe even replace it?
And they say the Left likes tin hats.
And you're saying that the pro-Choice John Tory is a fundamentalist Christian trying to insert Creationism into...
No, wait. You lost me there.
"And you're saying that the pro-Choice John Tory is a fundamentalist Christian trying to insert Creationism into..." actually he's just the one opening the door....
"Are you telling me John Tory was the one who shouted this out?" well either he said it first or he didn't which is it? I'm not sure what your getting at, The Liberal's said it first and Tory repeated it?
The fact is Tory brought up as a topic for this election. Why? I no idea why?
"So, you're saying that the Ontario School board is going to be overtaken by a great conspiracy to teach Creationism alongside Evolution or maybe even replace it?" obviously you missed the link provided as to what is happening in the US related to this issue.
My bad, here it is again
Really? Tory brought it up?
So, I guess you have a full transcript of when he talked about Creationism to show that, on his own, he decided to just start talking about Creationism and wasn't responding to a question somebody else brought up?
Please, go ahead and post the transcript or link to the transcript or a video of where John Tory brought it up all by himself.
But, as I said...
"I first heard about it in the G&M as something the Liberals were loudly criticizing, not as part of a news release by Tory himself"
Just read the John Tory quote that is being used (the one you quoted) and tell me that it reads like something carefully scripted and not like a spur of the moment answer to an unusual question. It doesn't. It's quite obvious that he was responding to a question in the moment.
Ergo, Tory wasn't the one bringing this up.
And the PC camp never made an allusion towards Creationism at even one single time before this story broke. Not even once!
Ergo, Tory wasn't the one bringing this up.
This whole Creationism issue is being used for two things: to help the Liberals (who made the criticisms that the G&M/CTV picked up and ran with) and to sell newspapers/advertising space.
Have you never heard of "Gotcha Politics"? Well, that's what this is. It's cheap and unintelligent and only serves to muddy the waters.
I'm still waiting for somebody to prove me wrong on how Tory's policy actually helps spread the Evolution teachings.
By the way, welcome to Ontario... we're not in Kansas anymore, Toto.
He opened himself up to it as soon as he proposed full funding for Faith based schools. So ya, he brought it up.
Tory screwed up plain and simple no matter how hard you try to spin it.
He answered a legitimate (whether you think so or not) question from the media, if he can't even get out of gates of an election without sticking his foot in his mouth, how's he going to last as premier.
"I'm still waiting for somebody to prove me wrong on how Tory's policy actually helps spread the Evolution teachings."????HUH???? Evolution teachings? you mean creation teaching, right? My concern is that it's an opening that can be exploited.
"By the way, welcome to Ontario... we're not in Kansas anymore, Toto." don't be such a patronizing fool.
Kitchener Conservative:
In the comments you stated "As much as 4 more years of McGuinty would taste like crap, I'd rather have that then creationism being taught in school."
Think about it... Is creationism REALLY THAT objectionable? You'd rather have McGuinty spew his nonsense, spend your money and break his promises for 4 more years rather than have kids taught what you ( and many others ) consider a fable. Nevermind that these kids are already in separate schools and are already taught creationism.
Creationism was taught in schools for ages in the past. Remember those days, when families stuck together, crime rates were much lower, political discourse was civil, justice was meted, babies weren't murdered for the sake of selfish adults....
Think about it.
"Think about it... Is creationism REALLY THAT objectionable? You'd rather have McGuinty spew his nonsense, spend your money and break his promises for 4 more years rather than have kids taught what you ( and many others ) consider a fable"....yes
"Creationism was taught in schools for ages in the past. Remember those days, when families stuck together, crime rates were much lower, political discourse was civil, justice was meted, babies weren't murdered for the sake of selfish adults...."
I assume you've forgotten that it was/is taught in church, by parents....as well (where is should be), Looks like the school system isn't the only one that has dropped the ball in your eyes.....
Typical blame the school system for all the worlds woes.
I didn't blame the school system for anything. If anything, it was a comment on the increased secularism in our society, so much so that we've lost our way.
The point is still... that you'd rather vote Lieberal than have creationism CONTINUE to be taught in separate schools who teach it now anyway.
A tad myopic my friend, just a tiny over-reaction on your part to a "fable". Kneejerk posts like yours do nothing to raise the level of civil, constructive, intelligent discussion in our society.
Surecure has it right...180 degrees right.
This (ISN'T) about forcing public schools to teach creationism.
This (IS) about forcing religious schools to teach evolution, especially if they want access to public funding.
You have all fallen for the liberal/socialist spin, can you say ..SUCKERS..
Go ahead vote for McLiar, just remember to blame yourself, after millions more of our tax dollars get STOLEN....!
I agree with William. Surecure does have it right. Tory truely blundered when he stepped into this mess, but now that he has, the Liberal spin-doctors are having a field day with it. This type of manipulation has always been one of the Liberals long suits. Tory just isn't seasoned enough to effectively retaliate and turn it to his advantage. I for one will still vote for Tory, since the alternative is just not an option I could live with.
You're not very conservative, are you!!!
You know what? You go ahead and vote Liberal if you want then. The fact that you would rather be lead down a path by McGuinty than by Tory, because he had a broad comment about funding faith based schooling shows that you don't care about the welfare of the province. OH NO! Faith based school funding. If you don't like it being taught, don't send your children to those schools. You do have that choice. What you don't have a choice in is paying taxes and getting reamed by the Ontario Government. McGuinty had 200+ promises 4 years ago and kept none of them. Now he is down to 70 some for this election campaign, how many of those do you expect him to keep? McGuinty continues to spend your own tax dollars in order to buy your votes (with your own money!). I will vote PC because the alternative is to stick my ass out to get reamed again by McGuinty for 4 more years of useless government that helps noone but themselves.
Actually Anonymous,
This is what I said "I may just, gulp, vote green or ndp , just so I don't have to vote Liberal either. It will depend on the candidate."
I will never vote Liberal.
I can't vote PC because this whole funding faith based schools is going down a path that will undermine education in this province.
There are 58,000 kids now, but with full funding how long before that number doubles, triples, or more.
How long before we have so many different boards and schools that our education system becomes a joke and we end up paying even more in taxes just to pay for all of it when we should have one school system.
Post a Comment