Our increasing government dependency means we now rely more than ever on elected representatives to fix all problems—large, small and even non-existent. Once upon a time, the Republican philosophy was for less government, but the populist overtake of the GOP means the trend is now toward activism.
We saw this during the recently completed session of the West Virginia Legislature, and one example has now become law. On Friday, Governor Jim Justice signed SB 280 which says the following:
“No public school board, school superintendent, or school principal may prohibit a public school classroom from responding to student inquiries or answering questions about scientific theories of how the universe and/or life came to exist.”
The background here is important. Initially, the bill specifically opened the door for teachers in all grades to teach intelligent design as a scientific theory of creation. It was modified during the legislative process to be a vague law that is open to interpretation.
First, intelligent design is not science; it is a religion-based story of creation. It is a matter of faith, not science. The scientific teaching of creation is evolution. According to the National Academy of Sciences, “Evolutionary biology has been and continues to be the cornerstone of modern science.” Intelligent design is not supported by scientific evidence.
Second, one could interpret the new law as creating an opportunity for a West Virginia teacher to proselytize about the origin of life. Fortunately, I don’t believe our science teachers are going to do that, at least I hope they aren’t. If they take their responsibilities seriously, they will adhere to the science that is subject to ongoing testing and refinement.
Third, imagine all the questions our schoolteachers get from inquisitive students. Questions and answers are an integral part of the learning process, and we should have enough faith in our teachers to expect them to be able to handle them all. So, why would West Virginia need a law that says school officials may not prohibit teachers from answering questions about scientific theories? There was never any direct testimony during the legislative process of situations where teachers faced punishment for discussions of how life began, only some second hand references.
I suspect that rather than kill the original bill, which is what lawmakers should have done, it was watered down by opponents in hopes that it won’t do much of anything. And maybe that is what will happen because of this law—nothing.
That is the best outcome, but it is not assured because of its vagueness.
It is not always necessary for government to “do something,” especially when the result creates uncertainty or attempts to address a problem that does not exist. Often it is preferable to do nothing, and that will have been a legitimate function of government.