Libs Lalor candidate: 'Homosexuality is a perversion'

I nearly choked on my toast Sunday morning when I read that the Liberal candidate for Lalor, a Pastor Peter Curtis, believes not only that homosexuality is a perversion, a position that has not been adopted in any psychological scientific sense for over 50 years, but also that Intelligent Design, the idea we were created by a higher being, namely God, should be taught alongside Darwinian Evolution in science class at high schools.

I don't really think I need to go into much detail as to why homosexuality is not a perversion, as a house plant could probably figure that one out, but I would like to explain why Pastor Curtis' views on science are a little off kilter. His argument rests in this idea that Evolution is 'a theory and not a science.' Alright, well if this was actually the case as he puts it then Intelligent Design is just a theory and not a science also, so why would either of them be taught seriously in anything other than religious studies? This however is not the real issue of his argument. He seems to think that a theory such as evolution, which is steeped in empirical scientific evidence, is on a par with ID, a theory with absolutely no empirical evidence, found only in a book written by some people anywhere between a few hundred to two thousand years ago.

Scientists use a number of methods to come to a theory. The methods used to come to the theory of evolution to explain our existence has empirical evidence attached to it. It is a theory that is not merely borne out of pure imagination, but one that best explains the phenomena using the available evidence. It also has unobservable evidence attached, such as notions of genes, theoretical entities explaining phenomena that we know to occur but cannot be seen with the naked eye or by instruments, and some philosophers of science would make the case that evidence that cannot be observed via sense experience is invalid, however many will agree that these explanations of our being in the world are true, or at the very least, adequate.

One cannot say the same for ID, which has no empirical or unobservable evidence backing it up. Let me make it clear that I am not on an anti-religious campaign, just that theories such as ID should not be placed in the same category as scientific theories. Once we start teaching ID in science class we might as well not bother with language or meaning, because science will be redundant as a term and as a field who's purpose is to get closer and closer to the truth about the world.

Take Competition out of Research and Education

This speech is by Dr. Jim Page, Democrats candidate for the seat of Ryan. Dr. Page touches on some very important points regarding the problems of the current direction of our higher education system, all of which are borne out of this obsession for competitiveness in areas of society that operate best on a collaborative and cooperative basis. Tertiary institutions exist because humanity has a thirst for knowledge, and this thirst is best quenched when administrative bodies, as well as researchers, are not concerned about aiming to be competitive to survive.

I was among a small group of students privileged to speak to Vice Chancellor Glyn Davis some months ago regarding Melbourne University's new Melbourne Model. Contrary to what the Socialist Alternative may tell you on campus, I gathered the impression that Glyn is someone who believes in the core principles of research and education, and is merely playing the game of competition because... well... he has to if his Uni is to flourish. I do not blame University administrations for the state of affairs. I do not blame Glyn Davis for the Arts faculty having to shed large amounts of subjects and staff to stay afloat. I do however blame the Howard government for its disinterest in funding tertiary institutes, not to mention a lack of a plan to tackle student poverty.