Courtesy of the National Center for Science Education

TWO ANTIEVOLUTION BILLS IN ALABAMA

On January 10, 2005, two identical bills -- House Bill 106 and Senate Bill
45 -- were introduced in the Alabama legislature, under the rubric of "The
Academic Freedom Act," and referred to the Committees on Education of their
respective chambers.Â* These identical bills purport to protect the right of
teachers to "present scientific information pertaining to the full range of
scientific views in any curricula or course of learning" and the right of
students not to be "penalized in any way because he or she may subscribe to
a particular position on any views."Â* In language reminiscent of the
Santorum language removed from the No Child Left Behind Act, they specify
that "[t]he rights and privileges contained in this act apply when topics
are taught that may generate controversy, such as biological or chemical
origins."Â* Presumably attempting to avert the charge that their provisions
would violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, the bills
also provide, "[N]othing in this act shall be construed as promoting any
religious doctrine, promoting discrimination for or against a particular
set of religious beliefs, or promoting discrimination for or against
religion or non-religion."

HB 106 and SB 45 resemble previous antievolution bills -- three bills
introduced in 2005 (HB 352, SB 240, and HB 716) and two bills introduced in
2004 (HB 391 and SB 336) -- all of which failed.Â* SB 45's sponsor, Senator
Wendell Mitchell (D-District 30), was a cosponsor of SB 240 and SB 336, of
which he reportedly said, "I think there is a tremendous ill-balance in the
classroom when you can't discuss all viewpoints. This bill will level the
playing field because it allows a teacher to bring forward the biblical
creation story of humankind" (Montgomery Advertiser, February 18,
2004).Â* HB 106's sponsor, Representative Scott Beason (R-District 51), was
the sole sponsor of HB 716.Â* A novelty in HB 106 and SB 45 is section 7,
providing, "Nothing in this act shall be construed as protecting as
scientific any view that lacks published empirical or observational support
or that has been soundly refuted by empirical or observational science in
published scientific debate. Likewise, the protection provided by this act
shall not be restricted by any metaphysical or religious implications of a
view, so long as the views are defensible from and justified by empirical
science and observation of the natural world."

For the text of HB 106 and SB 45, visit:
http://alisdb.legislature.state.al.u...ills/hb106.htm
http://alisdb.legislature.state.al.u...bills/sb45.htm

For NCSE's stories about previous bills in Alabama, visit:
http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=AL

TWO ANTIEVOLUTION BILLS IN MISSISSIPPI

Senate Bill 2427, introduced in the Mississippi Senate and referred to the
Committee on Education on January 10, 2005, would, if enacted, ensure that
"[n]o local school board, school superintendent or school principal shall
prohibit a public school classroom teacher from discussing and answering
questions from individual students on the issue of flaws or problems which
may exist in Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution and the existence of
other theories of evolution, including, but not limited to, the Intelligent
Design explanation of the origin of life."Â* The chief sponsor of SB 2427 is
Senator Charles Edwin Ross (R-District 20); its cosponsors are Senators
Patrick Alan Nunnelee (R-District 6) and William Gardner Hewes III
(R-District 49.)

House Bill 953, introduced in the Mississippi House of Representatives and
referred to the Committee on Education on January 16, 2005, would, if
enacted, enable Mississippi school boards "[t]o authorize the teaching of
'creationism' or 'intelligent design' in the public schools." Moreover,
"[i]f the school's curriculum requires the teaching of evolution, then the
teaching of 'creationism' or 'intelligent design' shall be required."Â* The
chief sponsor of HB 953 is Representative Mike Lott (R-District 104); the
cosponsors are Representatives Virginia Carlton (R-District 100), John L.
Moore (R-District 60), Gary V. Staples (R-District 8, and Carmel
Wells-Smith (R-District 111).Â* Wells-Smith introduced antievolution
legislation in previous legislative sessions:Â* HB 888 and 1101 in 2002, HB
1397 in 2003, and HB 1288 in 2004.Â* All of these bills died in committee.

For the text of SB 2427 and HB 953, visit:
http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/doc...9/SB2427IN.htm
http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/doc...9/HB0953IN.htm

For NCSE's stories about previous bills in Mississippi, visit:
http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=MS

A THIRD ANTIEVOLUTION BILL IN OKLAHOMA

Senate Bill 1959, introduced by Senator Daisy Lawler (D-District 24), is
the third antievolution bill to be introduced in the Oklahoma legislature
in 2006.Â* If enacted, SB 1959 would provide:

A. Every teacher in a public school in this state shall be authorized to
present information and allow classroom discussions that provide for views
that may pertain to the full range of scientific views in any science course.
B. No public school teacher in this state shall be terminated, disciplined,
or otherwise discriminated against for presenting scientific information
authorized pursuant to subsection A of this section.
C. Nothing in this act shall be construed as requiring or encouraging any
change in the state curriculum standards for public schools.
D. Nothing in this act shall be construed as promoting any religious
doctrine, promoting discrimination for or against a particular set of
religious beliefs, or promoting discrimination for or against religion or
nonreligion.

Like its predecessors, House Bills 2107 and 2526, SB 1959 will presumably
be considered after the legislature convenes on February 6, 2006.

While evolution is not mentioned in the text of SB 1959, the phrase "the
full range of scientific views" presumably originates in the so-called
Santorum language removed from the No Child Left Behind Act.Â* Moreover,
Sections A and B resemble sections A and B of HB 2107, section C is
identical to the second half of section D of HB 2107, and section D is
identical to section E of HB 2107.Â* Unlike HB 2107, however, SB 1959 is
silent about "academic freedom," Edwards v. Aguillard, and "topics ... that
may generate controversy, such as biological or chemical origins of life."