The consideration of whether ID is merely religious, or might also be scientific was demanded by both case law, and the original filings of the Dover parents, and school board. The reasoning is very clearly presented by Judge Jones in Section E of the Court Decision, "Application of the Endorsement Test to the ID Policy." Had ID creationism been a valid scientific proposal, it could be taught regardless of the apparent support it, and its advocates, give to sectarian Judeo-Christian-Islamic creationism. So, the issue was unavoidable.
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Dr_Gary_Hurd writes:
The consideration of whether ID is merely religious, or might also be scientific was demanded by both case law, and the original filings of the Dover parents, and school board. The reasoning is very clearly presented by Judge Jones in Section E of the Court Decision, "Application of the Endorsement Test to the ID Policy." Had ID creationism been a valid scientific proposal, it could be taught regardless of the apparent support it, and its advocates, give to sectarian Judeo-Christian-Islamic creationism. So, the issue was unavoidable.
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.