You're right, Eugene, and I'd forgotten how they almost made it over the Constitutional hump on that label -- I think part of the difficulty is in the latter parts of the label that suggest, with no good research hook to hang the argument on, that there are alternatives in science to evolution theory. Urging students to examine alternatives that exist only in religiously-based tracts is rather a give away.
And that gets back to my original suspension of belief: I don't think a disclaimer would pass most of these boards that didn't disparage evolution theory in some way, even if minor. Physicist Jeremy Bernstein, writing about Einstein's 1905 papers and how a journal editor could tell Einstein wasn't a crackpot, notes the responsibility of the author to demonstrate an understanding of the accepted theory she or he is about to twist or overturn. I think that a warning label less piquant but close to "This is science, get over it; if you have a contrary argument, show your original research," might pass muster. The Louisiana misadventure notwithstanding, the Court approved a moment of silence in Georgia that avoided all mentions of faith after striking down Alabama's law. If evolution critics want to make a label to avoid religious offense while withstanding judicial scrutiny, they need to compose a warning that avoids religious defense, too.&nb!
sp;
There's the rub.
Ed Darrell
Dallas
"Volokh, Eugene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Volokh, Eugene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, I think that many schools would find that quite useful, but
note that a similar disclaimer was struck down on Establishment Clause
grounds in Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Bd. of Ed., 185 F.3d 337 (5th
Cir.1999) and, I think, Selman v. Cobb County School Dist., 2005 WL
83829 (N.D.Ga.2005). Here's the Felier disclaimer: "It is hereby
recognized by the Tangipahoa Board of Education, that the lesson to be
presented, regarding the origin of life and matter, is known as the
Scientific Theory of Evolution and should be presented to inform
students of the scientific concept and not intended to influence or
dissuade the Biblical version of Creation or any other concept. It is
further recognized by the Board of Education that it is the basic right
and privilege of each student to form his/her own opinion or maintain
beliefs taught by parents on! this very important matter of the origin of
life and matter. Students are urged to exercise critical thinking and
gather all information possible and closely examine each alternative
toward forming an opinion."
Eugene
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Darrell
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 2:40 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Public schools and parents
My experience is that anti-evolution parents have issues well beyond
biology classes that they can generally get their kids out of with
little difficulty, and that the drive to insert other-than-evolution
materials is not simply to "balance" an issue. But for Eugene's
hypothetical, let's assume that to be the case.
In that case, would it not satisfy the religious objections of the
parents to disclaim a religious endorsement, instead of disclaiming the
science? Would the parents in Cobb County who asked for the disclaimers
be satisfied with a disclaimer note that says "This biology book is not
intended to dissuade any student from any religious belief" (or a
better-phrased sticker that makes it clear that there is no endorsement
of any religious view in the teaching of the science)?
If the complaint really is about a presumed religious view offered when
the science is taught, why not simply disclaim that religious view and
leave the science alone? Surely it would be within the law for a
governmental agency to note that it makes no religious endorsement in a
given case, in support of Constitutional principles.
Ed Darrell
Dallas
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
