Okaaaaay ... but what do you mean by "scientific theories"?

from the 2012 Texas Republican Platform:

Controversial Theories – We support objective teaching and equal treatment of all sides of scientific theories. We believe theories such as life origins and environmental change should be taught as challengeable scientific theories subject to change as new data is produced. Teachers and students should be able to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of these theories openly and without fear of retribution or discrimination of any kind.

I also support objective teaching and equal treatment of all sides of scientific theories.  And by scientific theories, I mean theories that are based in science, not theories that are theological in nature and labelled as science.  And I know you don't want to believe it, but all scientific theories proposed by actual scientists are subject to change as new data is produced.  Actual scientists, rather than armchair scientists.  New data, rather than a new spin on old stories.

And for the final point:  Yes, actual science should be discussed openly without fear of retribution from political watchdogs wary of the social implications of honest intellectual discourse.

But, even though our words are the same, I'm not sure we actually mean the same thing, based on your track record.

Padma Lakshmi by Helmut Newton

Padma Lakshmi

World's Calmest Man

THERAPISTS ALERT:  Homeowners association (aka. Neighborhood Nazis) in Stapleton, Colorado, wants to ban sidewalk chalk, saying it's "offensive and disturbing.:.  Clearly, there are some adults seriously in need of therapy - and quick!!.  Electroshock may be necessary, though portable generators for said therapy might be against local NN regulations.  Perhaps orbitoclasts are allowed in the neighborhood.

Disturbed people say no to children with chalk.

(Can't we ban homeowners associations on the grounds that they are offensive and disturbing???)