The Sun's most recent misguided editorial "Greening the curriculum" (Sept. 23) falls short on so many levels that it's hard to know where to start. If I were cynical, I would say that this reeks of a ploy by the liberal elite establishment to further dumb down the employment prospects of inner-city youth, hence ensuring another crop of welfare-dependent Democratic voters.
The statement that "there is nothing political about learning the science behind the natural processes that govern the Earth and the effects of humanity's interaction on them" is patently wrong, and The Sun knows it. In fact, everything about this statement is mired in political controversy.
There is a reason that many Maryland schools currently offer units on weather geology and other environmental topics as part of their regular courses, but not on the topic of global warming. These subjects are non-controversial, largely undisputed and of a sound basis. The curriculum the Sun is suggesting is not.
While there is no doubt unanimity of opinion on this subject in the liberal elite circles the editors run in, there is nowhere near unanimity of opinion on the subject of man's impact on the environment in scientific circles or among the general public. While most people recognize some level of human impact, its scope is very much open to debate and subjective, as would be any classroom instruction given on this topic. Thousands of scientists dispute the notion that there is definitive evidence that most of the present warming is due to the greenhouse effect, as many Al Gore disciples claim. Given that the Texas school board that oversees the printing of our nation's textbooks can't come to agreement on the subject of history, which is of course documented, how in the world are they or anyone else going to come to agreement on what should be published in a textbook governing a subject as controversial as this one?
Even more disturbing is ease with which liberal elites include the current crop of inner-city school children as guinea pigs to push their social agenda. Enough is enough. I question the motives of anyone trying to push this agenda upon inner-city public school students, which desperately require every second of instruction possible on the subjects that will one day allow them to garner gainful employment: reading, math, science, etc. These students, whose classroom time is already diluted by incorrigible classmates, uninvolved parents and inept bureaucracy, will now have their precious classroom time further diluted by a subject that nobody is really clear on? Is this the best use of their time? Is this the chance we want to give them in life?
At the very least, this program (and others like it) should be restricted to children who are currently testing at grade level in all subjects, so that those children testing below grade-level can concentrate on what's most important. That, and it should be restricted to the teaching of things that are fact based and non-controversial, but we all know that's not going to happen.
Michael P. DeCicco, Severn