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

And yet, as Janice just reported, a California school board apparently was
just sued by a group of parents backed by Americans United for Separation of
Church and State for doing this very thing -- a case that Pim has indicated
he and other Panda's Thumbers support. Who knows how that case will turn
out, but when you have establishment clause jurisprudence that focuses on
mushy things like "intent" and "perception," this is what you get.

On 1/11/06, Ted Davis <tdavis@messiah.edu> wrote:
>
> >>> <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 08:44:09 2006