You are here

Antievolution amendment defeated in South Carolina


A proposal to direct the South Carolina state board of education to approve only textbooks that "emphasize critical thinking and analysis in each academic content" was rejected by the House Committee on Education and Public Works on May 16, 2006.

A new antievolution maneuver in South Carolina


A subcommittee of the South Carolina House Committee on Education and Public Works voted 3-2 on April 3, 2006, to approve Senate Bill 114, amended to direct the state board of education to approve only textbooks that "emphasize critical thinking and analysis in each academic content," The State reported (April 4, 2006).

Antievolution proposal rejected in South Carolina


On March 8, 2006, the South Carolina Board of Education voted 11-6 to reject a proposal from the state's Education Oversight Committee that would have significantly expanded the "critical analysis" language already present in the section of the new state science standards that deal with evolution.

Antievolution legislation in South Carolina again


On June 1, 2005, a bill modeled on the so-called Santorum language stripped from the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 was introduced in the South Carolina Senate and referred to the senate's Committee on Education. If enacted, S.

"Alternatives to evolution" language dropped


According to the Associated Press [Link broken], a South Carolina education subcommittee removed the provision from S 114 that would have established a South Carolina Science Standards Committee to "study standards regarding the teaching of the origin of species; determine whether there is a consensus on the definition of science; [and] determine whether alternatives to evolution as the origin of species should be offered in schools." (For the history and purpose of the provision, see

Antievolution legislation afoot


On December 15, 2004, S 114 was introduced (by prefiling) in the South Carolina Senate and referred to the Committee on Education.

General Assembly Adjourns

On June 5 the South Carolina General Assembly adjourned its current session. Among the proposed bills killed by this action was S153, which had passed the Senate and was waiting for action in a House committee. As outlined in another story on this page, this bill would have established a 19-member "Science Standards Committee" to "(1) study science standards regarding the teaching of the origin of species; (2) determine whether there is a consensus on the definition of science; (3) determine whether alternatives to evolution as the origin of species should be offered in schools. "

Anti-evolution legislation in South Carolina

On April 29 the South Carolina Senate passed S153 and forwarded it to the House of Representatives, where it was referred to the Committee on Education and Public Works. This bill originally dealt with instructional materials for public schools. On April 9 Sen. Michael Fair proposed an amendment which would have required a disclaimer in all kindergarten through 12th grade science books stating "The cause or causes of life are not scientifically verifiable.

Textbook Disclaimer Proposed

The South Carolina Senate is considering S153, a bill dealing with instructional materials and textbooks. On April 9 an amendment was offered by Sen. Fair with the following key provision:

(B) The following must be placed in all science books published for kindergarten through twelfth grade:
'The cause or causes of life are not scientifically verifiable. Therefore, empirical science cannot provide data about the beginning of life.'

State Board Approves Biology Textbooks

On December 11, 2002 the South Carolina Board of Education voted 10-5 to approve a number of new biology textbooks for local adoption across the state next fall. Several board members had objected to the way evolution was presented in some of the books, but a motion to remove two biology texts from the list failed by a 9-6 vote. Some board members were quoted in a December 22 news story in the Charleston Post & Courier as opposing one book because its preface referred to "creation science" and "intelligent design" as "pseudoscience".

Pages

Subscribe to South Carolina