You are here
Ohio's HB 597, introduced in 2014, would, if enacted, require the state's science standards to, "prohibit political or religious interpretation of scientific facts in favor of another." The bill includes numerous ammendments to the Common Core Cirriculum, including history and literature, but the most troubling is within Sec. 3301.079, article iii. The bill is currently pending within the House Rules and Reference Committee.
The Kentucky bill HB 260, introduced in 1922, is identical to the Kentucky bill SB 136. If passed, HB 260 would have: prohibited the teaching of evolution in any public institutions within the state; prohibited the use of textbooks containing lessons on evolution; impossed fines up to $1000 for violators. Those found guilty would also be forced to forfeit their academic positions and salary. Finally, the bill presented clear steps for witnesses to report violators to the appropriate compliance boards.
SB 136 introduced in Kentucky in 1922, if enacted, would have prohibted the teaching of evolution, as well as any textbooks containing material about evolution in any academic public institution within Kentucky. Stiff fines of up to $1000 would be imposed upon personnel found to be teaching evolution, as well as the forfeiture of their position within their academic institution. The bill also presented formal steps in which to bring complaints to advisory boards against personnel violating stated laws within the bill. The original version did not pass.
Introduced in Kentucky in 1922, HB 191 was the first bill to explicitly mention the theory of evolution, and Darwinism. It aimed at preventing the teaching of such theories from both personnel (teachers, superintendents, principals, etc), as well as the public instiutions (college, university, training school, etc) themselves that allowed or promoted such lessons. Personnel found in violation of the proposed bill could face a monetary fine up to $5000, as well as imprisonment up to 1 year. Institutions found in violation could face a fine up to $5000 and forfetuire of its charter.
A bill introduced in Utah on February 1st, 1921, most likely the first legislative bill of the 20th century that could influence the teaching of evolution. The bill prohibited the teaching of certain sectarian, religious, and moral doctrines. Although the bill contained language to prevent the teaching of explicit religious doctrines, the bill also contained language that prevented teaching of 'atheistic or infidel' doctrines, which was largely associated with evolutionary theory. Moral instruction was 'permitted' in the bill, again, largely associated with religious thinking and belief.
Introduced on April 19th, 1888 in Kentucky, a bill introduced to amend and reform the Kentucky common school laws, contained a section that is likely the first legislative attempt to regulate the teaching of evolution in the United States school system. The bill and the contained section passed both the Kentucky House and Senate. It is interesting to note that this article has been reenacted and lightly modified since its original introduction in 1888.
A House Resolution introduced in Hawaii in 2014, that proposed February 12th of each year as Darwin Day "to celebrate all of Charles Darwin's achievements in the field of science." The resolution is unusual in establishing Darwin Day on a perennial basis: previous Darwin Day resolutions, such as Virginia's House Resolution 884 in 2009, typically designate February 12 of the current year as Darwin Day.
A joint resolution considered in Oklahoma in 2014, that contained a proposed ammendment aimed at rejecting the new Oklahoma Academic Standards for Science due to the Standard's stance on climate change. Very similar to OK HJR 1099.
A joint resolution considered in Oklahoma in 2014, that contained an ammendment that aimed to reject the new Oklahoma Academic Standards for Science due to the Standard's stance on climate change. Similar to OK HJR 1097.
A bill introduced in Oklahoma in 2014, that would have required state and local educational authorities to "assist teachers to find more effective ways to present the science curriculum where it addresses scientific controversies" and permitted teachers to "help students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories pertinent to the course being taught."