HB2211 is a proposed bill that has recently passed the Oklahoma House Education Committee. The bill is called the “Religious Viewpoints Antidiscrimination Act” (you can access the full text here). The proponents of this bill claim that it’s purpose is to protect students from religious discrimination, but the bill is actually a Trojan horse – a stealth bill that has a different purpose – as a backdoor method for getting creationism into the public schools.

Such deceptive lawmaking is nothing less than malfeasance – it is the work of ideologues who are trying to make an end-run around the Constitution, around public debate, and sneak in their ideology under a deceptive label. It is exactly like the “Healthcare freedom” laws that a number of states have that are not really about promoting healthcare freedom but rather their specific function is to protect quacks and charlatans from being held accountable to a reasonable standard of care.

Among other things, HB2211 states:

A school district shall treat the voluntary expression by a student of a religious viewpoint, if any, on an otherwise permissible subject in the same manner the district treats the voluntary expression by a student of a secular or other viewpoint on an otherwise permissible subject and may not discriminate against the student based on a religious viewpoint expressed by the student on an otherwise permissible subject.

What does this mean? It’s devilishly ambiguous, but the purpose seems to be to allow a student who is asked in science class “how old is the earth” to answer “6,000 years” if that is their religious belief. It would also allow a Mormon student to offer their personal religious views in lieu of accepted history, or a student studying geology to offer as an acceptable answer that the Grand Canyon was created by Noah’s flood.

The purpose of the bill is clear – to open the door for religious views not only in schools but in the classroom, on homework assignments and on tests. Such a law is an abomination of religious freedom, not a protection of it. It violates the Constitutional provision for separation of church and state, and is also degrades the quality of student education. I suspect that the promoters of the law wish, if nothing else, to make the teaching of certain topics, like evolution, as controversial as possible, hampered by legal landmines. That way teachers and schools are likely just to avoid it altogether, and textbook manufacturers will be motivated to avoid it lest their book sales suffer. This strategy has been unfortunately successful over the last century, creating an American public that is largely scientifically illiterate concerning one of the fundamental pillars of modern science.

The law also misses a very critical point – within a science class student are expected to learn and understand science. Their personal beliefs are irrelevant. It is understood that what is being taught is all within the framework of science. Students need only demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of the science, and don’t ever have to profess personal belief.

This episode reminds me of another situation five years ago. Professor Michael Dini at Texas Tech University was under investigation for refusing to give his personal recommendation to students who did not profess acceptance of evolutionary theory. This caused quite a controversy. His defenders argued that he has the right to apply whatever standard he deems appropriate is handing our his personal recommendation – therefore this is an issue of academic freedom. His critics argued that he was just applying what amounts to a negative religious litmus test – and therefore this is an issue of religious freedom.

The compromise, I think, was actually an optimal solution. Professor Dini agreed that he would ask students who wish his recommendation to demonstrate that they understand the theory of evolution, but do not have to profess belief in it. This solution reflects what is, and should be, the reality in science classrooms anyway. The point is to learn the science. No one really cares (at least in the context of public education) what you believe. As far as I know schools and teachers do not grade students by asking them to make pledges of belief, they grade them by asking them to demonstrate their knowledge.

Which brings up a very important point – what actual discrimination is HB2211 designed to prevent? It seems like a solution for a nonexistence problem. The alleged problem, it seems, it little more than a convenient fiction. First it promotes the myth, now very popular among evolution deniers, that those who reject evolution are the victims of discrimination. Second, it creates a boogeyman for creationists to rally against. And third (and most importantly) it opens the door for religion views in schools, including the science classroom.

Since public schools do not require belief, only knowledge, such a law can only shield a student from having to demonstrate adequate knowledge of a subject on which they are being tested. It remains to be seen how such extensively a law would be applied, but theoretically a biology student could decide not to learn anything about evolution, population genetics, paleontology, etc. and on every test question about such topics can simply insert their “voluntary expression” of their “religious viewpoint” that God did it. In fact, this may open up a market for rubber stamps with the phrase “it was a miracle” imprinted on them, and such students can simply rubber stamp that reply to any science question that runs afoul of their religious beliefs. With little effort they can avoid learning any science at all.

Such laws are nothing new. There is an identical law currently on the books in Texas, passed about a year ago, and we are simply waiting for the first test cases to come to court. I doubt the law will pass Constitutional muster, but what a profound waste of time and effort in the meantime. And keep in mind, the ultimate goal is to hamper the teaching of evolution with controversy and legal wrangles as much as possible. When one strategy burns itself out legally, they invent another. That is why eternal vigilance against the darkness of ignorance and intolerance is forever necessary.

Toward that end the Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education are on the job. On their website you will find updates on this issue, as well as the names and e-mail addresses of legislators to whom you can voice your opinions about HB2211. And of course the National Center for Science Education maintains a watchful eye on shenanigans of the anti-evolutionists in all 50 states.

This bill has not yet passed the Senate so there is still time to kill it. In the past broad and negative attention toward anti-scientific initiatives such as this have been successful in embarrassing legislators into ending such travesties, at least for a while. Ideologues often like to work under cover of darkness, far away from public attention, concealed by deceptive language. Shining a light on them will often make them scurry away, at least for a while.