On a very strange blog called “Approaching Women is An Art” appears an even stranger post called “Creationism in Schools: an Unethical Approach,” apparently imported from another blog. This essay suggests several possible conclusions: that illiteracy is apparently no bar to writing what purports to be a scholarly essay; that the American educational system has hit rock bottom; that English is an endangered language, and that Ed Wood is alive and blogging. It is also possible, I suppose, that the article was originally written in Mongolian and translated by a fifth grader.

In high school, as an editor of the school paper, I once took an incomprehensible submission, mixed up all the lines of print in random order, and published it under the headline, “Discrimination in Portugal.” It still made more sense than “Creationism in Schools: an Unethical Approach.”

The question the post primarily raises is whether submitting an essay for public consumption creates a basic obligation of minimal competence. (I vote yes.) A related question (and I also vote yes on this one)  is whether a blog operator has a duty to avoid inflicting on its readership the output of authors without the ability to articulate a thought more effectively than (to take one of many, many wonderful examples in the post)….

“Aside from that, theories such as creationism have been simply inapt in an tutorial setting. First as good as foremost, a First Amendment to a United States Constitution was meant to settle a quite physical supervision and, thus, a religiously neutral tutorial setting. By training creationist thought, a element of subdivision in in in in between church as good as state is violated.”

The post reminded me of a famous episode of “I Love Lucy.” I’d identify it, but I think I would rather find out how many Ethics Alarms readers 1) know it or 2) never heard of “I Love Lucy.”

“Creationism in Schools: an Unethical Approach” can be read here and also here.

Enjoy.