Re: [asa] Brownback on evolution

Dave,

What matters is what the term means in the context of the jurisprudence.
I'm slowly building a blog that has all the text of the US Supreme Court
cases.
But I recently added Kaufman from the 7th Circuit because it is interesting,
even though it only holds in that one circuit. It actually addresses the
details of your question.
I could post the relevant (establishment clause) parts of it here if you
like. It would have to be a series. It actually says that government
agencies don't have the right to ban religious ideas, BTW. It reinforces
the idea that ideas pertaining to "ultimate" questions are protected,
(getting that from previous case).

Cheers,
Dave C

On 6/14/07, Dave Wallace <wdwllace@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> David Clounch wrote:
>
> > Banning ideas if they are religious in nature can be banned from
> > public schools under the first amendment.
>
> What exactly does "religious" mean in this context and how does it
> relate to "world view". I have been reading The God Delusion and IMHO
> many of the ideas Dawkins expresses have a faith component and are
> essentially religious in nature. Has not such a religious position been
> established at least in schools by the Dover decision?
>
> Dave W
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Jun 15 22:00:53 2007