For the record: I am not a proponent of including intelligent design or creation science in school age text books. I can't claim to have made any study of the ID arguments, but I have it on authority from very religious scientists that I trust that they are basically bogus.
So lets grant my position. ID is bad science and ought not to be taught in the public schools as a matter of sound pedagogy.
Does it follow that it is an establishment clause violation.
What valid, secular reason could there be for teaching bad science as good science?
What valid, religious reason could there be for teaching disproven claims as not disproven?
It only becomes an establishment clause violation when one hijacks the Ohio Board of Education, the No Child Left Behind Act, the Darby, Montana school board, the Texas textbook approval process, the Tennessee No Evolution Act, or some other legal tool to force the teaching of the thing as true, in public schools.
Kids in parochial schools may not be protected from such teachings.
Ed Darrell
Dallas
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
