Teaching about Religion

intelligent design The argument

that life is too complex to be formed through natural selection as portrayed by Darwin; therefore, it must be directed by an “intelligent designer.” Similar conclusions have been reached by courts hearing complaints about New Age classroom materials in California and several other states.72

In 1987, the US Supreme Court considered Edwards v. Aguillard, a case that challenged Louisiana’s Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science Act. Creation science, or creationism, is the belief that life has developed through divine intervention or creation rather than initially through biological evolution. The Louisiana act required that creation science be taught wherever evolution was taught and that appropriate curriculum guides and materials be developed. The Supreme Court ruled this law unconstitutional. By requiring “either the banishment of the theory of evolution...or the presentation of a religious viewpoint that rejects evolution in its entirety,” the Court reasoned, the Louisiana act advanced a religious doctrine and violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment.73

intelligent design Controversy sometimes associated with the creationist point of view escalated in the twenty-first century as the intelligent design concept was introduced in a growing number of schools. This point of view argues that life is too complex to be formed through natural selection as portrayed by Darwin; therefore, it must be directed by a so-called intelligent designer. Many advocates of intelligent design avoid explicit references to divine creation, instead emphasizing what they view as flaws (including lack of valid evidence) in the theories developed by Darwinists.74

Actions initiated by advocates of intelligent design included a Cobb County (Ga.) school board requirement that biology texts have stickers stating that “This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact....This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered,” and a similar curriculum-statement in which the Dover (Pennsylvania) school board suggested that students learn about intelligent design. These and several comparable actions have been challenged in federal courts, where judges have concluded that intelligent design involves support for particular religions and is not a scientific theory that can be required or inserted in the science curriculum. However, some analysts have noted that intelligent design still might be studied appropriately in social studies or elsewhere in the curriculum.75

9-4e teaching about Religion

Guarantees of separation between church and state do not prohibit public schools from teaching about religion or about controversial topics involving religion. Some states and school districts have been strengthening approaches for developing an understanding of religious traditions and values while neither promoting nor detracting from any particular religious or nonreligious ideology. In addition, many scholars have been preparing materials for such constitutionally acceptable instruction.76

72Smith v. Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County, 87-7216, 11th Cir. (1987); and Doktor Zoom, “Academic Freedom to Teach Bible as Science Upheld in Lucky Louisiana,” April 24, 2014, posting by Wonkette, available at www.wonkette.com/547520/academic -freedom-to-teach-bible-as-science-upheld-in-lucky-louisiana. 73Edwards v. Aguillard, 197 S. Ct. 2573 (1987); and Simon Brown, “The Evolution of Creationism,” March 2014 posting by Citizens United, available at www.au.org. 74Elizabeth Culotta, “Is ID on the Way Out?” Science (February 10, 2006, p. 570); and “Darwin Shmarwin,” Economist (February 19th, 2014), available at www.economist.com. 75Joseph Dunn and Martha Derthick, “A Setback in Dover,” Education Next, No. 2 (2006), available at www.educationnext.org; and “What Has Been the Outcome of Court Cases Testing Creationism and Intelligent Design?” June 20, 2014, posting by David H. Bailey, available at www.sciencemeetsreligion.org/evolution/court-cases.php. 76For example, see Susan Black, “Teaching about Religion,” American School Board Journal (June 2003); C. M. Bailey, ‘Teaching the Bible in Public Schools,” 2011 posting by Blog Critics, available at www.blogcritics.org; and Lisa Webster, “Taking (Public School) Teachers to Church, and the Mosque, and the Temple...,” August 4, 2014, posting by Religion Dispatches, available at www.religiondispatches.org.