You realize that, depending on how one interprets this, evolution might have never originally been brought into classrooms at at all? It wasn't until it started getting taught at at least the university level that it started to spread beyond a fairly small group of naturalists...
Oh, good call. And sometimes in education it's necessary to simplify the truth, teach the common special cases (e.g. Newtonian mechanics). I guess there should be a sliding scale, then – in elementary/primary school, teach simplified but accepted truth, and as one advances towards and through college, when the students are better equipped to understand and question what is being taught, introduce advanced and controversial material. I guess most sciences are taught this way already.
A. to make claims about what is true and what is not [is free speech] B. to slander someone [isn't]
A does not include B?
A includes B, but the special rule of B supersedes the rule of A. B – slander – doesn't include statements like "noneuklid is a nimrod"; it's restricted to statements like "noneuklid is a rapist", which can do major harm. (In some precincts, you could even get onto the sex offenders lists from no more than an unfounded accusation!)
What do you mean, "speak 'Bunny'"?
Oh, good call. And sometimes in education it's necessary to simplify the truth, teach the common special cases (e.g. Newtonian mechanics). I guess there should be a sliding scale, then – in elementary/primary school, teach simplified but accepted truth, and as one advances towards and through college, when the students are better equipped to understand and question what is being taught, introduce advanced and controversial material. I guess most sciences are taught this way already.
A. to make claims about what is true and what is not [is free speech]
B. to slander someone [isn't]
A does not include B?
A includes B, but the special rule of B supersedes the rule of A. B – slander – doesn't include statements like "