Re: Judge Jones sided with the Discovery Institute and ruled against the Dove...

>>> <drsyme@cablespeed.com> 01/10/06 11:59 AM >>>asks:

What if the Dover school board had wanted to get ID into
the public schools, by proposing that ID be taught in
philosophy classes instead of science classes? Assuming
the motivations otherwise were the same, would ID in
philosophy classes violate the establishment clause?

***

Ted replies:

This issue was directly address last spring at a public symposium nearby.
The speaker was the lead plaintiff attorney from the ACLU, and his opinion
is as follows: ID can be discussed in philosophy or religion classes, as far
as the ACLU is concerned; in those classes, other philosophical and
religious perspectives can also be discussed. Thus, the ACLU opposes only
ID in science classes.

This IMO is highly ironic: it's OK to discuss ID in class, as long as it
isn't the class whose subject is most closely related to the issues
contested by advocates of ID.

His opinion is part of the basis for my opinion, namely that ID is a
legitimate topic in secular journals and books devoted to philosophy of
science; and philosophy of science can be discussed in science classes.
This is where Judge Jones went wrong and ruled too broadly, BUT NEITHER THE
DEFENSE NOR THE PROSECUTION made this point, so he can't be blamed for
this.

Furthermore, Ed Larson agrees with me--at least he agreed with me as the
trial was still on, before Jones' ruling. (I don't know what he thinks
right now, after the ruling.) And, which is a great surprise to many no
doubt, Eugenie Scott of NCSE also conceded to me one day in the court
gallery that a science teacher can discuss ID in class, as long as they have
a clear secular purpose for doing so. Thus the Dover ruling might go beyond
even what Eugenie Scott thinks.

Ted
Received on Wed Jan 11 08:36:14 2006