Talk:Big Daddy? (Chick tract)
Panel 7's footnote - "It has never been against the law to teach creationism in public schools." There's another red herring here...a bit of misdirection. The footnote is true, it's never been against the law to teach creationism...provided you teach it in a comparative religions class (or similar), and not as science or fact. You're correct to point out that the student is justified in expressing his religious opinion - though I'd add that the primary justification for this because he was asked to do so.
Going through the various rulings on the subject we see a clearer picture (all rulings affect public schools only):
- Epperson v. Arkansas (Supreme)
- Schools cannot ban evolution
- Edwards v. Aguillard (Supreme)
- Schools cannot require equal time for creationism
- (Note that this is probably the case you meant to cite as it specifically targets "equal time" issues)
- McLean v Arkansas (District)
- Creation science is religious dogma (unchangeable with new evidence) which means it's not science
- As it's not science, it can't be taught as fact and "equal time" is not allowed
- Webster v. New Lennox School District (7th Circuit)
- Teachers can't take it upon themselves to teach creationism
- Doing so is a violation of the 1st amendment, just as if it had been ordered by the school
- This is the key case that points out the critical flaw in the footnote. If creationism is taught in science class, by a teacher, it's illegal.
You can use this or ignore it, I'll probably put together a quickie article on creationism in the public schools, based on these and other items - though I have no idea how quickly I'll get to that. Sans Deity 23:14, 18 August 2006 (MST)