A RETURN TO THE SCOPES MONKEY TRIAL? A LOOK AT THE APPLICATION OF THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE TO THE NEWEST TENNESSEE SCIENCE CURRICULUM LAW
|
|
- Claud Jenkins
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 A RETURN TO THE SCOPES MONKEY TRIAL? A LOOK AT THE APPLICATION OF THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE TO THE NEWEST TENNESSEE SCIENCE CURRICULUM LAW Brette Davis I. Introduction In 1925, Tennessee found itself in the national spotlight for the prosecution of an educator who allegedly violated Tennessee law by teaching the theory of evolution in his classroom. 1 John Scopes was found guilty, but the verdict was later overturned by the Tennessee Supreme Court. 2 While the Scopes Monkey Trial led many states to consider introducing antievolution legislation, 3 this trial really highlighted the tension between the science community and the religious community. 4 The battle over the teaching of evolution in schools continued after Scopes was decided and is still prevalent today. 5 Recently, a new Monkey Bill, as some would call it, was passed by the Tennessee legislature and became law when the Governor failed to sign the legislation. 6 This legislation allows educators to teach alternate theories to evolution, including creationism. 7 Many feel that this legislation returns Tennessee to the Scopes era when the theory of evolution was prohibited in schools. 8 With all of the breakthroughs in science and technology, critics claim that this is a 1 Noah Adams, Timeline: Remembering the Scopes Monkey Trial, NPR, (May 15, 2012). 2 Tim Ghianni, Tennessee law allows creationism theory in classrooms, Reuters, (April 10, 2012). 3 Deborah A. Reule. The New Face of Creationism: The Establishment Clause and the Latest Efforts to Suppress Evolution in Public Schools, 54 Vand. L. Rev. 2555,2556 (2001). 4 Only two states, Alabama and Louisiana, actually introduced legislation prohibiting evolution in textbooks and in the classroom. Joyce F. Francis, Creationism v. Evolution: The Legal History and Tennessee's Role in That History, 63 Tenn. L. Rev. 753, 758 (1996). 5 Supra n. 3, at Supra n. 2, at 1. 7 Supra n. 2 at 1 8 Supra n. 2, at 1.
2 step backwards for the state, as well as science in general. 9 This paper looks to address the constitutionality of this Tennessee law, as well as the implications it has on religion and science. Part II of this paper will address the intersection of Christianity and science regarding evolution, showing that the two are not contradictory fields. Part III of this paper will examine the establishment clause, as well as case law particular to the evolution vs. creationism debate. Part IV of this paper will analyze the constitutionality of the new Tennessee law, arguing that it does not violate the First Amendment of the Constitution. II. Intersection of Christianity and Science There is a great misconception that Christianity and science are incompatible. The presiding worldview is that one must choose their faith or science; a person must either believe in evolution, or that God created the Heavens and the Earth. 10 The misguided propositions generally accepted are that (1) scientists are atheists, and (2) Christians discard evolution. 11 However, despite this culture war between science and religion, many religious leaders and scientists dispute the claims that a person can only believe in God or in evolution. 9 Supra n. 2, at Professor Francisco Ayala of the University of California, Irvine, has observed that many of his first year biology students admit that they will answer questions on evolution the way a teacher wants them to, even though they do not believe in evolution, because of their Christian beliefs. However, after students have spent years studying science, they give up their faith entirely because they now believe solely in science, not religion. Somehow, science and Christianity have become incompatible. Francisco Ayala, The Christian Man's Evolution: How Darwinism and Faith Can Coexist, Scientific American 1 (2008). Interestingly, Darwin himself also gave up his Anglican belief, but only after the death of his ten year old daughter, and because he did not want to accept that family members of his were in Hell, not because of his theory of evolution. Dinesh D'Souza, The Two Faces Of Darwin, Townhall, (2009) Joel W. Martin, What Do Most Christians Really Believe About Evolution?, The Biologos Forum, 1 (2010).
3 Alvin Plantinga argues that a belief in God and a belief in evolution are not actually in conflict. 12 Part of the reason for the apparent conflict stems from the fact that broad words such as religion and evolution are used without actually being defined. 13 For example, which theory of evolution is actually being discussed, (1) ancient earth thesis, (2) progress thesis, (3) descent with modification, (4) the common ancestry thesis, or (5) naturalistic origins thesis, to name a few, is crucial to determining any potential conflict with a Biblical reading of the Earth s creation. 14 Consequently, the incompatibility between Christianity and science is almost always assumed, but it is actually generally erroneous. Part of the source of the conflict is that theologians who read the Bible literally believe in a very young Earth compared to evolutionary scientists. 15 Yet there are many Christian leaders today who do not read the word day in Genesis to mean a literal twenty-four hour day. 16 Consequently, a religious belief in how long it took for the creation of earth does not have to conflict with the scientific theory dating the Earth back billions of years. 17 Another potential conflict between creationism and evolution is the Biblical idea that man was created in the image of God. 18 That God created creatures with a moral sense and the capacity to know and love [H]im is completely consistent with evolution. 19 Even the idea that man adapts and mutates is consistent with the thought that God is the creator. As stated by Charles Hodge, [i]f God made them, it makes no difference how he made them, whether at 12 Plantinga argues that there is actual conflict between theistic religion and a faction of evolutionary theorists that claim that evolution is unorchestrated or unguided by God or any other being, but not the general theory of evolution. Alvin Plantinga, Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism, Oxford University Press (2011). 13 One claim is that there are over forty definitions of Christianity. Supra n. 11, at Supra n. 12, at chapter Supra n. 12, at chapter Supra n. 12, at chapter Supra n. 12, at chapter Supra n. 12, at chapter Supra n. 12, at chapter 1.
4 once or by the process of evolution. 20 Evolution does not exclude God as the designer. Thus, the conflict between creationism and evolution is merely superficial. Therefore, it is possible to reconcile Christian beliefs with evolutionary theories. There is scientific proof that, over time, species evolve. This does not disprove Biblical creationism. God can be the creator and the designer of evolution. However, because of the removal of science from religion and the atheistic focus now on science, society has forced people to choose between creationism and evolution. Nevertheless, many scholars, philosophers, and scientists acknowledge that science and religion are harmonious, and specifically, so is creation at the hand of God compatible with evolution. III. The Establishment Clause Notwithstanding a potential reconciliation between the theories of creation and evolution, the battle over what is taught in school science classes has continued since Scopes. 21 As this culture war entered the court system, the First Amendment Establishment Clause was implemented. 22 The Establishment Clause, in part, requires that government action does not promote any particular religion. Therefore, the question becomes, when a school district allows for the teaching of alternate theories to evolution in the classroom, is there a violation of the First Amendment? The courts have instated a multitude of tests to help analyze Establishment Clause issues. 20 Supra n. 12, at chapter According to Joyce Francis, this battle rages on because it is a fight for the minds and souls of the nation s youth. Joyce F. Francis, Creationism v. Evolution: The Legal History and Tennessee's Role in That History, 63 Tenn. L. Rev. 753 (1996). 22 The First Amendment states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
5 A. The Lemon Test The primary test used by the courts to establish the constitutionality of laws relating to evolution in the classroom was established in Lemon v. Kurtzman. 23 In Lemon, the contested government action was regarding the allocation of government funds to nonpublic schools. 24 The court utilized a three-prong test to determine the constitutionality of the government action. 25 The court held that the statute (1) must have a secular legislative purpose, (2) its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advance nor inhibit religion, and (3) must not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion. 26 After applying the Lemon test, the court found that the statutes in question violated the First Amendment Establishment Clause. 27 The Lemon test has been flushed out by the courts over the years. Under the first prong of the Lemon test, the government policy does not have to have a predominantly secular purpose, but it must be sincere and not a sham. 28 The second prong, the effects test, requires the court to determine whether or not the policy has a neutral effect on society. 29 Finally, the third prong asks the court to decide if the policy causes excessive government entanglement with religion. 30 This three-prong test is still used by courts today; however, many critics believed that the Lemon test is becoming less prominent Deborah Reule, The New Face of Creationism: The Establishment Clause and the Latest Efforts to Suppress Evolution in Public Schools, 54 Vand. L. Rev. 2555, 2565 (2001). 24 Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 602, (1971). 25 Supra n. 21, at Lemon, 403 U.S. 602, Lemon, 403 U.S. 602, Supra n. 23, at Supra n. 23, at Supra n. 23, at Supra n. 23, at 2566.
6 B. The Endorsement Test In Lynch v. Donnelly, the court created the endorsement test, which looks to see if the government action endorses a particular religion. 32 Justice O Connor stated in her concurrence to the Lynch decision that the second prong of the Lemon test should actually look to see if the state endorses or disapproves of a particular religion. 33 When applying the endorsement test, courts must look at what the state intended to communicate, as well what the state actually communicated. 34 In Lynch, the Court held that when a city displays a Christmas manger for the holidays, the government was not endorsing Christian beliefs, particularly because such a display generally represents the holiday, and it was displayed along with other non-religious holiday symbols like a Santa Clause. 35 C. The Coercion Test The Court, in Lee v. Weisman, introduced the coercion test. 36 In Lee, the Court held that coercion is not necessary to prove a violation of the Establishment Clause, but it is sufficient to prove such a violation. 37 This test is used to evaluate government sponsored exercises of religion in schools, particular when participation by students is obligated. 38 Generally, the implementation of curricula is not considered to be government sponsorship of a religious 32 Supra n. 23, at Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668, 691 (1984). 34 Supra n. 23, at Lynch, 465 U.S. at Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577, 604 (1992). 37 Id. at Supra n. 23, at 2568.
7 exercise. 39 But, the Court did determine in Lee that starting a commencement ceremony with a prayer amounted to coercion or inducement, and therefore, the policy was unconstitutional. 40 D. Important Judicial Decisions Regarding Science Curricula After the Scopes Monkey Trial, many states considered implementing anti-evolution legislation. For example, Arkansas promulgated a law barring the teaching of evolution in public schools. 41 After a group of biology teachers selected a textbook which included the theory of evolution, the Arkansas Education Association used Susan Epperson, a biology teacher, to adjudicate the constitutionality of the state statute. 42 In Epperson, the Supreme Court held that the Arkansas statute was unconstitutional because it was clearly not religiously neutral. 43 The Establishment Clause forbids alike the preference of a religious doctrine or the prohibition of theory which is deemed antagonistic to a particular dogma. 44 The Court sustained the idea that schools have the right to determine the curricula for public schools, but the justices emphasized that this right does not extend to government action that criminally prosecutes teachers for teaching a prohibited scientific theory when that prohibition violates the First Amendment. 45 This departure from Scopes is the first in a line of cases striking down statutes dealing with creationism and evolution. Consequently, it is essential to discuss Epperson when analyzing an Establishment Clause case regarding school curricula. Fourteen years following the decision in Epperson, Arkansas tried to implement a new law that required teachers to balance the treatment of both evolution and creationism in the 39 Supra n. 23, at Lee, 505 U.S Supra n. 23, at Supra n. 21, at Epperson v. State of Ark., 393 U.S. 97, 109 (1968). 44 Id. at Id. at 107.
8 classroom. 46 In fact, many states looked at balanced-treatment legislation as the way to promulgate constitutional legislation regarding evolution. 47 Though McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education did not reach the Supreme Court, the federal district court used the Lemon test to analyze the constitutionality of the Arkansas balancing legislation. 48 The court held that this balancing test violated the Establishment Clause because the legislation was passed for the sole purpose of advancing religion. 49 The law failed the first prong of the Lemon test because it was simply trying to put a Biblical view of creation into the curriculum, and the school failed to show any secular legislative purpose. 50 Therefore, this type of balancing legislation also fails to conform to the Establishment Clause. Five years after McLean, another type of balancing legislation, this time from Louisiana, was challenged before the Supreme Court. 51 In Edwards v. Aguillard, the legislation at issue did not require a school to teach either creationism or evolution; however, if one of these theories was taught, so to must the other theory be taught. 52 The government argued that this satisfied the Establishment Clause because it was promoting academic freedom, an important secular purpose. 53 Nevertheless, the Supreme Court, while noting that the Court is deferential to the government s stated secular purpose, also noted that the secular purpose may not simply be a sham. 54 The Court held that this type of balancing actually did nothing to promote academic 46 The creationism being discussed is a science-based version. Supra n. 23, at Supra n. 23, at Rex R. Schultze, Evolution and Creation Science in Your School: "The Monkey Business Continues...", 79 Neb. L. Rev. 901, 904 (2000). 49 McLean v. Arkansas Bd. of Ed., 529 F. Supp. 1255, 1264 (E.D. Ark. 1982). 50 Id. at Supra n. 21, at Supra n. 21 at Supra n. 21 at Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578, (1987).
9 freedom. 55 Rather, this legislation would actually serve to narrow the science curriculum because it was possible that neither theory would ever be taught in the classroom. 56 Accordingly, this type of balancing legislation is also unconstitutional in light of the Establishment Clause. In 2004, a school board in Pennsylvania passed a resolution that required teachers to explain to students that there are gaps in the theory of evolution, providing some of the missing answers using the theory of Intelligent Design, among other theories. 57 In Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, the court applied both the endorsement test and the Lemon test. 58 The Court found that teaching Intelligent Design amounts to the endorsement of one particular religion, as it is simply another form of teach Biblical creationism. 59 Consequently, under the endorsement test, this legislation violates the Establishment Clause. In sum, in the years since the Scopes Monkey Trial, courts have been reluctant to uphold legislation that prohibits evolution or promotes creationism. Analyzing statutes and regulations under the traditional Establishment Clause tests, courts have held that prohibitions on evolution, the introduction of Intelligent Design, and laws that attempt to balance evolution and creation in the classroom, cannot pass constitutional muster. Therefore, such legislation must be deemed unconstitutional because of the First Amendment. IV. Tennessee House Bill 368, Senate Bill 893 It is now necessary to return to Tennessee where the debate between creation and evolution began in the court system in In April, 2012, legislation was enacted by 55 Id. at Supra n. 23, at Kevin Trowel, Divided by Design: Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, Intelligent Design, and Civil Education, 95 Geo. L.J. 855, 859 (2007). 58 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area Sch. Dist., 400 F. Supp. 2d 707, 712 (M.D. Pa. 2005). 59 Id. at 716.
10 Tennessee which allows public school teachers to explore the weaknesses in evolution. 60 Specifically, the legislation attempts to create an environment that encourages students to explore scientific questions, learn about scientific evidence, develop critical thinking skills, and respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about controversial issues. 61 Additionally, the legislation allows teachers to to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught, and nobody has the authority to prohibit teachers from doing so. 62 Furthermore, the legislation specifically states that [t]his section only protects the teaching of scientific information, and shall not be construed to promote any religious or non-religious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs or non-beliefs, or promote discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion. 63 As such, the courts may soon be faced with determining the constitutionality of this Tennessee legislation. There are many commentators on both sides of the debate over this legislation. Proponents argue that this law promotes true academic freedom. 64 Though he allowed the legislation to become law through a technicality that ensured its passage if he failed to sign the legislation, Governor Haslam stated that he believes that the law does not change the scientific standards that are taught in our schools or the curriculum that is used by our teachers. 65 The law simply allows for students to explore scientific alternatives to the school curriculum. On the other hand, opponents of the bill argue that this backwards thinking brings science education 60 Deborah Zabarenko, Tennessee teacher law could boost creationism, climate denial, Chicago Tribune, 1 (April 11, 2012). 61 HB0368, 62 Supra n Supra n Supra n. 61, at Mackenzie Weinger, Creationism bill becomes Tenn. Law, Politico, 1 (2012).
11 back to the early 1920 s. 66 They argue that this will allow unsound science to be introduced in to the classroom, like creationism or the denial of climate change. 67 Thus, the question becomes whether or not this polarizing legislation passes constitutional muster. First, simply because the legislation states that it is not endorsing any particular doctrines or belief-systems, the law does not necessary conform to the Lemon test or the endorsement test. While this language of the law is evidence towards congressional intent to create this legislation for a secular purpose, the secular purpose cannot be a sham. Therefore, if the rest of the legislation is deemed to endorse a particular religion or foster excessive government entanglement with religion, the legislation would violate the Establishment Clause. Consequently, the rest of the language of the legislation must also be analyzed using the constitutional tests. 68 The legislation at issue in Tennessee is similar to the legislation in Edwards where the secular purpose was academic freedom. However, this legislation rectifies the issues the Supreme Court found with the legislation in Edwards. The distinguishing characteristic between the two pieces of legislation is that the Tennessee law does not remove evolution from the classroom. At the same time, it does not mandate the teaching of an alternative theory of evolution, like creationism. This legislation simply allows teachers to discuss alternative theories if they are brought up by students in the classroom. 69 Students are merely encouraged to explore 66 Supra n. 2, at Supra n. 60, at 1. Eugenie Scott, director for the National Center for Science Education, described the bill as a permission slip for schools to bring creationism, climate-change denial and other non-science into science classrooms. Elizabeth Flock, Law allows creationism to be taught in Tenn. public schools, Washington Post 1 (2012). 68 Note that the coercion test is not applicable in this case because determining curriculum does not constitute government sponsorship of a religious exercise. Therefore, the tests to apply in this case are the Lemon test and the endorsement test. 69 Supra n. 2, at 1.
12 scientific theories and question any weaknesses they perceive. Additionally, the stated secular purpose of academic freedom is not a sham in this case because there is no prohibition on evolution, no mandate to teach creationism, and it is the students raising the alternative theories, not the educators. This law is not a ruse for teachers in Tennessee to preach Biblical creationism. Moreover, unlike the legislation in Epperson, this particular legislation is religiously neutral because it still requires teachers to follow a science curriculum that discusses evolution; the legislation simply allows for the interjection of alternative theories if a student mentions such a theory, religious in nature or not. Hence, this legislation has a legitimate secular purpose of promoting academic freedom; any religious focus in the classroom is incidental, and theoretically non-existent in a given school year. As to the second prong of the Lemon test, the Tennessee law does not advance or inhibit religion, so there is a neutral effect on society. Students are encouraged to explore and debate alternative theories to evolution, meaning that they are free to reject any theory, and they are permitted to voice their own opinions regarding any theory. Teachers themselves are not allowed to raise alternative theories, but the state asks the teachers to explore theories raised by a student. 70 Again, this law is not a guise for allowing educators to teach Biblical doctrines. Consequently, this particular law is neutral on its face, and it does not advance or inhibit a particular religion. Turning to the third prong of the Lemon test, the Tennessee law does not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion. Once more, teachers are only required to discuss alternative theories to evolution if one is raised by a student. Plus, the law specifically 70 Supra n. 2, at 1.
13 protects the teaching of scientific information only, not non-scientifically based doctrines. 71 Also, while it is not dispositive in showing the constitutionality of the legislation, the fact that the language points out that the law is not promoting any particular doctrine aids in showing that there is no excessive government entanglement with religion. So, this legislation also passes the third part of the Lemon test. As a result, under the Lemon test, the Tennessee law is constitutional. Nevertheless, the Lemon test does not exhaust the issue because the court would also have to analyze the legislation using the endorsement test. 72 Similarly to the analysis under the Lemon test, a court would be hard-pressed to find that the Tennessee law endorses religion. First, the legislation specifically disclaims any endorsement. Second, this law protects the teaching of scientific information, not religious or non-scientific information. 73 Also, this statute does not mandate the teaching of any religious doctrine, such as creationism, but merely allows for any alternative theory to be discussed if a student brings it up in class. 74 Any mention of a religious doctrine like creationism in the classroom would only come at the request of a student, making it incidental. The state intended to create a religiously neutral piece of legislation, and they actually did so. As discussed above, the legislation s true intent is not to teach students about creationism, but to allow for discussion of scientific alternative theories. As such, the Tennessee legislation does not violate the Establishment Clause when using the endorsement test. test. In sum, this law should be upheld under the First Amendment using any constitutional 71 Supra n. 60, at 1. In fact, Governor Haslam believes that the legislation is almost pointless because it does nothing to change existing law. Supra n. 2, at It is important to note that the endorsement test often overlaps with the second prong of the Lemon test. 73 Supra n. 60, at For example, if a student wishes to discuss the big bang theory in regards to the creation of the earth, a teacher would be asked to explore this theory. This particular theory is not a religious doctrine.
14 V. Conclusion To conclude, case law has clearly defined the constitutional tests for analyzing Establishment Clause cases. Since Scopes in the early 1900 s, courts have used these tests to analyze legislation regarding the teaching of evolution and creation in public schools. For the most part, courts have found legislation prohibiting a discussion of evolution or laws mandating a discussion of creationism to be unconstitutional. However, the new law in Tennessee learned from the language of these prior statutes and cured the constitutional violations by creating a religiously neutral law with a secular purpose. As such, the Tennessee law that opens the door to discussions of creation and intelligent design in public schools does not violate the Establishment Clause, and if the law is adjudicated, courts should hold that it passes constitutional muster. Hopefully this legislation can serve to unite the science community and the religious community by eliminating the superficially drawn battle lines and allowing for an open and honest discussion.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 530 U. S. (2000) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES TANGIPAHOA PARISH BOARD OF EDUCATION ET AL. v. HERB FREILER ET AL. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
More informationCedarville University
Cedarville University DigitalCommons@Cedarville Student Publications 7-2015 Monkey Business Kaleen Carter Cedarville University, kcarter172@cedarville.edu Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/student_publications
More informationForum on Public Policy
The Dover Question: will Kitzmiller v Dover affect the status of Intelligent Design Theory in the same way as McLean v. Arkansas affected Creation Science? Darlene N. Snyder, Springfield College in Illinois/Benedictine
More informationMEMORANDUM. Teacher/Administrator Rights & Responsibilities
MEMORANDUM These issue summaries provide an overview of the law as of the date they were written and are for educational purposes only. These summaries may become outdated and may not represent the current
More informationSurvival of the Fittest: An Examination of the Louisiana Science Education Act
St. John's Law Review Volume 84, Spring 2010, Number 2 Article 7 Survival of the Fittest: An Examination of the Louisiana Science Education Act Robert E. Morelli Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/lawreview
More informationMarch 27, We write to express our concern regarding the teaching of intelligent design
March 27, 2015 Paul Perzanoski, Superintendent, Brunswick School Department c/o Peter Felmly, Esq. Drummond Woodsum 84 Marginal Way, Suite 600, Portland, ME 04101-2480 pfelmly@dwmlaw.com Re: Creationism
More informationMcCollum v. Board of Education (1948) Champaign Board of Education offered voluntary religious education classes for public school students from
McCollum v. Board of Education (1948) Champaign Board of Education offered voluntary religious education classes for public school students from grades four to nine. Weekly 30- and 45-minute classes were
More informationThe Pledge of Allegiance and the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment: Why Vishnu and Jesus Aren't In the Constitution
ESSAI Volume 2 Article 19 Spring 2004 The Pledge of Allegiance and the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment: Why Vishnu and Jesus Aren't In the Constitution Daniel McCullum College of DuPage Follow
More informationDOES INTELLIGENT DESIGN HAVE A PRAYER? by Nicholas Zambito
DOES INTELLIGENT DESIGN HAVE A PRAYER? by Nicholas Zambito Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the King Scholar Program Michigan State University College of Law Under the direction
More informationToto, I've a Feeling We're Still in Kansas? The Constitutionality of Intelligent Design and the 2005 Kansas Science Education Standards
Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology Volume 7 Issue 2 Article 10 2006 Toto, I've a Feeling We're Still in Kansas? The Constitutionality of Intelligent Design and the 2005 Kansas Science Education
More informationThe Scopes Trial: Who Decides What Gets Taught in the Classroom?
Constitutional Rights Foundation Bill of Rights in Action 22:2 The Scopes Trial: Who Decides What Gets Taught in the Classroom? One of the most famous trials in American history took place in a small town
More informationIntelligent Judging Evolution in the Classroom and the Courtroom George J. Annas, J.D., M.P.H.
legal issues in medicine Intelligent Judging Evolution in the Classroom and the Courtroom George J. Annas, J.D., M.P.H. Religious arguments have permeated debates on the role of the law in medical practice
More informationTactics, Strategies & Battles Oh My!: Perseverance of the Perpetual Problem Pertaining to Preaching to Public School Pupils & Why it Persists
Tactics, Strategies & Battles Oh My!: Perseverance of the Perpetual Problem Pertaining to Preaching to Public School Pupils & Why it Persists Casey S. McKay 8 U. MASS. L. REV. 442 ABSTRACT This Comment
More informationEstablishment of Religion
Establishment of Religion Purpose: In this lesson students first examine the characteristics of a society that has an officially established church. They then apply their understanding of the Establishment
More informationCreationism and the Theory of Biological Evolution in the North Carolina Standard Course of Study
8 School Law Bulletin Winter 2002 Creationism and the Theory of Biological Evolution in the North Carolina Standard Course of Study by Drew D. Dropkin For almost a century, American religious leaders,
More informationIn Brief: Supreme Court Revisits Legislative Prayer in Town of Greece v. Galloway
NOV. 4, 2013 In Brief: Supreme Court Revisits Legislative Prayer in Town of Greece v. Galloway FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Lugo, Director, Religion & Public Life Project Alan Cooperman, Deputy
More informationReligion in Public Schools Testing the First Amendment
Religion in Public Schools Testing the First Amendment Author: Rob Weaver, University of Miami School of Law, 2009-2010 Center for Ethics and Public Service, Street Law Intern, J.D. Candidate, 2011. Edited
More informationEvolution and Creation Science in Your School: "The Monkey Business Continues..."
Nebraska Law Review Volume 79 Issue 4 Article 9 2000 Evolution and Creation Science in Your School: "The Monkey Business Continues..." Rex R. Schultze PGH&G Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr
More informationMEMORANDUM ON STUDENT RELIGIOUS SPEECH AT ATHLETIC EVENTS. The Foundation for Moral Law One Dexter Avenue Montgomery, AL (334)
MEMORANDUM ON STUDENT RELIGIOUS SPEECH AT ATHLETIC EVENTS The Foundation for Moral Law One Dexter Avenue Montgomery, AL 36104 (334) 262-1245 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good
More informationSelman v. Cobb County School District: The Evolution of Establishment Clause Jurisprudence. Matthew Cutchen. Introduction
Selman v. Cobb County School District: The Evolution of Establishment Clause Jurisprudence By Matthew Cutchen Introduction [1] The attempts to maintain a uniform orthodox opinion among teachers should
More informationTEXTBOOKS DISCLAIMED OR EVOLUTION DENIED: A CONSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS OF TEXTBOOK DISCLAIMER POLICIES AND ACADEMIC FREEDOM ACTS
TEXTBOOKS DISCLAIMED OR EVOLUTION DENIED: A CONSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS OF TEXTBOOK DISCLAIMER POLICIES AND ACADEMIC FREEDOM ACTS ABSTRACT For decades, the United States has been involved in a public and sometimes
More information*1 THIS IS THE TRAP THE COURTS BUILT: DEALING WITH THE ENTANGLEMENT OF RELIGION AND THE ORIGIN OF LIFE IN AMERICAN PUBLIC SCHOOLS
*1 THIS IS THE TRAP THE COURTS BUILT: DEALING WITH THE ENTANGLEMENT OF RELIGION AND THE ORIGIN OF LIFE IN AMERICAN PUBLIC SCHOOLS Jana R. McCreary [FNa1] Copyright (c) 2008 Southwestern Law School; Jana
More informationTactics, Strategies & Battles Oh My!: Perseverance of the Perpetual Problem Regarding Preaching to Public School Pupils & Why it Persists
University of Mississippi From the SelectedWorks of Casey Scott McKay March 20, 2013 Tactics, Strategies & Battles Oh My!: Perseverance of the Perpetual Problem Regarding Preaching to Public School Pupils
More informationShould We Take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance?
Should We Take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance? An atheist father of a primary school student challenged the Pledge of Allegiance because it included the words under God. Michael A. Newdow, who has
More informationTACTICS, STRATEGIES & BATTLES OH MY: PERSERVERANCE OF THE PERPETUAL PROBLEM REGARDING PREACHING TO PUBLIC SHOOL PUPILS & WHY IT PERSISTS
University of Mississippi From the SelectedWorks of Casey Scott McKay February 11, 2013 TACTICS, STRATEGIES & BATTLES OH MY: PERSERVERANCE OF THE PERPETUAL PROBLEM REGARDING PREACHING TO PUBLIC SHOOL PUPILS
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
-.. 03/19 To: The Chief Justice Justice' Brennan Justice White Justice' ~arshall Justice Blackmun Justice Stevens Justice O'Connor Justice Scalia From: Justice Powell Circulated: IAR 1 t 1 e8t Recirculated:
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
04/24 To: The Chief Justice Justice Brennan Justice White Justice Marshall Justice.Blackmun Justice \Stevens Justice O'Connor Justice Scalia From: Justice Powell Circulated: Recirculated:_ AP_R_ 2_ 4 _
More informationFirst Amendment Religious Freedom Rights and High School Students
First Amendment Religious Freedom Rights and High School Students Larry L. Kraus The University of Texas at Tyler Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God,
More informationC. Howard, Chisum, et al. ORGANIZATION bill analysis 4/30/2007 (CSHB 3678 by B. Cook)
HOUSE HB 3678 RESEARCH C. Howard, Chisum, et al. ORGANIZATION bill analysis 4/30/2007 (CSHB 3678 by B. Cook) SUBJECT: COMMITTEE: VOTE: Voluntary student expression of religious views in public schools
More informationAn Update on Religion and Public Schools. Outline
An Update on Religion and Public Schools Ohio Council of School board Attorneys School Law Workshop Columbus, Ohio November 10, 2015 2.00-3.15 PM Charles J. Russo, J.D., Ed.D. Panzer Chair in Education
More informationAmendment I: Religion. Jessica C. Eric K. Isaac C. Jennifer Z. Grace K. Nadine H. Per. 5
Amendment I: Religion Jessica C. Eric K. Isaac C. Jennifer Z. Grace K. Nadine H. Per. 5 Free Exercise Clause Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
More informationThis statement is designed to prevent the abridgement of anyone's freedom of worship.
FREEDOM OF RELIGION The FREE EXERCISE Clause: or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. This statement is designed to prevent the abridgement of anyone's freedom of worship. Generally, ALL beliefs are
More informationIs It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution
Washington University Law Review Volume 83 Issue 1 2005 Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution Matthew J. Brauer Barbara Forrest Steven G. Gey Follow this and additional
More informationSANDEL ON RELIGION IN THE PUBLIC SQUARE
SANDEL ON RELIGION IN THE PUBLIC SQUARE Hugh Baxter For Boston University School of Law s Conference on Michael Sandel s Justice October 14, 2010 In the final chapter of Justice, Sandel calls for a new
More informationNYCLU testimony on NYC Council Resolution 1155 (2011)] Testimony of Donna Lieberman. regarding
125 Broad Street New York, NY 10004 212.607.3300 212.607.3318 www.nyclu.org NYCLU testimony on NYC Council Resolution 1155 (2011)] Testimony of Donna Lieberman regarding New York City Council Resolution
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 532 U. S. (2001) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES CITY OF ELKHART v. WILLIAM A. BOOKS ET AL. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
More informationCREATIONISM AND INTELLIGENT DESIGN
CREATIONISM AND INTELLIGENT DESIGN BRIAN MacDONALD The debate over how to address the origins of life in American schools has been ongoing for almost a century. Proponents of creationism and intelligent
More informationIn This Apple for Teacher an Apple from Eve - Reanalyzing the Intelligent Design Debate from a Curricular Perspective
NORTH CAROLINA LAW REVIEW Volume 85 Number 1 Article 7 12-1-2006 In This Apple for Teacher an Apple from Eve - Reanalyzing the Intelligent Design Debate from a Curricular Perspective Mary Katherine Hackney
More informationJohn H. Calvert, Esq. Attorney at Law
John H. Calvert, Esq. Attorney at Law Kansas Office: Missouri Office: 460 Lake Shore Drive West 2345 Grand Blvd. Lake Quivira, Kansas 66217 Suite 2600 913-268-3778 or 0852 Kansas City, MO 64108 Dr. Steve
More informationPassive Acknowledgement or Active Promotion of Religion? Neutrality and the Ten Commandments in Green v. Haskell
BYU Law Review Volume 2010 Issue 1 Article 2 3-1-2010 Passive Acknowledgement or Active Promotion of Religion? Neutrality and the Ten Commandments in Green v. Haskell Stephanie Barclay Follow this and
More informationEgor Ivanov Professor Babcock ENGL 137H: Section 24 October 28, 2013 The Paradigm Shift from Creation to Evolution
Ivanov 1 Egor Ivanov Professor Babcock ENGL 137H: Section 24 October 28, 2013 The Paradigm Shift from Creation to Evolution Controversy over the creation of mankind has existed for thousands of years as
More informationRUTGERS JOURNAL OF LAW AND RELIGION
RUTGERS JOURNAL OF LAW AND RELIGION Volume 8.2 Spring 2007 Evolution Toward Neutrality: Evolution Disclaimers, Establishment Jurisprudence Confusions, and a Proposal of Untainted Fruits of a Poisonous
More informationReligious Freedoms in Public Schools
CURRICULUM CONNECTIONS SPRING 2007 18 Lesson 2 Religious Freedoms in Public Schools Rationale Religious freedom is a sensitive, but critical, subject in developing an understanding of the rights of U.S.
More informationJULY 2004 LAW REVIEW RELIGIOUS MESSAGE EXCLUDED FROM CHRISTMAS DISPLAYS IN PARK. James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D James C.
RELIGIOUS MESSAGE EXCLUDED FROM CHRISTMAS DISPLAYS IN PARK James C. Kozlowski, J.D., Ph.D. 2004 James C. Kozlowski In the case of Calvary Chapel Church, Inc. v. Broward County, 299 F.Supp.2d 1295 (So.Dist
More informationProtect Science Education! A Toolkit for Students Who Want to Keep Evolution in Schools
Protect Science Education! A Toolkit for Students Who Want to Keep Evolution in Schools This toolkit is part of a new series of special reports addressing threats to America s public school system. We
More informationIntelligent Design. Kevin delaplante Dept. of Philosophy & Religious Studies
Intelligent Design Kevin delaplante Dept. of Philosophy & Religious Studies kdelapla@iastate.edu Some Questions to Ponder... 1. In evolutionary theory, what is the Hypothesis of Common Ancestry? How does
More informationSAMPLE. What Is Intelligent Design, and What Does It Have to Do With Men s. Chapter 3
Chapter 3 What Is Intelligent Design, and What Does It Have to Do With Men s Testicles? So, what do male testicles have to do with ID? Little did we realize that this would become one of the central questions
More informationGreece v. Galloway: Why We Should Care About Legislative Prayer
Greece v. Galloway: Why We Should Care About Legislative Prayer Sandhya Bathija October 1, 2013 The Town of Greece, New York, located just eight miles east of Rochester, has a population close to 100,000
More informationPersistent Monkey on the Back of the American Public Education System: A Study of the Continued Debate Over The Teaching of Creationism and Evolution
The Catholic Lawyer Volume 41 Number 1 Volume 41, Summer 2001, Number 1 Article 7 November 2017 Persistent Monkey on the Back of the American Public Education System: A Study of the Continued Debate Over
More informationNebraska Law Review. Philip Sparr University of Nebraska College of Law. Volume 86 Issue 3 Article 5
Nebraska Law Review Volume 86 Issue 3 Article 5 2007 Special "Effects": Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, 400 F. Supp. 2d 707 (M.D. Pa. 2005), and the Fate of Intelligent Design in Our Public Schools
More informationWhy It Mattered to Dover That Intelligent Design Isn't Science
FIRST AMENDMENT LAW REVIEW Volume 5 Issue 1 Article 6 9-1-2006 Why It Mattered to Dover That Intelligent Design Isn't Science Richard B. Katskee Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.unc.edu/falr
More information1/15/2015 PRAYER AT MEETINGS
PRAYER AT MEETINGS FRAYDA BLUESTEIN SCHOOL OF GOVERNMENT A. What statement best describes the relationship between government and religion: B. The law requires a separation between church and state. C.
More informationBy: Asma T. Uddin ABSTRACT
1 Evolution Toward Neutrality: Evolution Disclaimers, Establishment Jurisprudence Confusions, and a Proposal of Untainted Fruits of a Poisonous Tree By: Asma T. Uddin ABSTRACT This Article deals with the
More informationCreation and Evolution: What Should We Teach? Author: Eugenie C. Scott, Director Affiliation: National Center for Science Education
Creation and Evolution: What Should We Teach? Author: Eugenie C. Scott, Director Affiliation: National Center for Science Education Bio: Dr. Eugenie C. Scott is Executive Director of the National Center
More information*83 FOCUSING TOO MUCH ON THE FOREST MIGHT HIDE THE EVOLVING TREES: A RESPONSE TO PROFESSOR IRONS
*83 FOCUSING TOO MUCH ON THE FOREST MIGHT HIDE THE EVOLVING TREES: A RESPONSE TO PROFESSOR IRONS JanaR. McCreary [FNa1] Copyright (c) 2008 Southwestern Law School; Jana R. McCreary I. Introduction: A Misguided
More informationWARNING! EVOLUTION LIES WITHIN: Preserving Academic Freedom in the Classroom with Secular Evolution Disclaimers
Washington University Journal of Law & Policy Volume 16 Access to Justice: The Social Responsibility of Lawyers New Federalism January 2004 WARNING! EVOLUTION LIES WITHIN: Preserving Academic Freedom in
More informationBOW YOUR HEADS Purpose: Procedure:
BOW YOUR HEADS Purpose: Freedom of religion like other First Amendment issues, can be complex. At times, the two clauses relating to freedom of religion conflict, as can be seen in two Supreme Court cases
More informationScience, Evolution, and Intelligent Design
Science, Evolution, and Intelligent Design Part III: Intelligent Design and Public Education Précis Presented to The Roundtable in Ideology Trinity Baptist Church Norman, OK Richard Carpenter November
More informationGod & Caesar The Ancient Modern Clash
God & Caesar The Ancient Modern Clash Tim Castner God and Caesar in America: Major Court Decisions on God and Caesar Issues Contact information reminder: GodandCaesar@gmail.com or thcastner@comcast.net.
More informationTeacher Case Summary Lee v. Weisman (1992) School Graduation Prayer
Teacher Case Summary Lee v. Weisman (1992) School Graduation Prayer By Deborah Morris Burton, J.D. Copyright 2013, Deborah Morris Burton First Edition All rights reserved. This book may not be duplicated
More informationRELIGION IN THE SCHOOLS
INDC Page 1 RELIGION IN THE SCHOOLS In accordance with the mandate of the Constitution of the United States prohibiting the establishment of religion and protecting the free exercise thereof and freedom
More informationEdwards v. Aguillard: The Supreme Court's Deconstruction of Louisiana's Creationism Statute
Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy Volume 3 Issue 4 Symposium on Values in Education Article 6 1-1-2012 Edwards v. Aguillard: The Supreme Court's Deconstruction of Louisiana's Creationism
More informationCongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the RELIGIOUS FREEDOM CENTER freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right
More informationPlaying the Proof Game: Intelligent Design and the Law
Playing the Proof Game: Intelligent Design and the Law Frank S. Ravitch* Intelligent design advocates argue that excluding intelligent design from educational and scientific environments discriminates
More informationOctober 3, Humble Independent School District Eastway Village Drive Humble, TX 77338
October 3, 2016 Dr. Elizabeth Fagen Superintendent Humble Independent School District 20200 Eastway Village Drive Humble, TX 77338 April Maldonado Principal Eagle Springs Elementary School 12500 Will Clayton
More informationELON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW BILLINGS, EXUM & FRYE NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION SPRING 2011 PROBLEM
ELON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW BILLINGS, EXUM & FRYE NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION SPRING 2011 PROBLEM No. 11-217 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ADVOCATES, INC., Petitioner,
More informationChurch, State and the Supreme Court: Current Controversy
Berkeley Law Berkeley Law Scholarship Repository Faculty Scholarship 1-1-1987 Church, State and the Supreme Court: Current Controversy Jesse Choper Berkeley Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/facpubs
More informationSeptember 24, Jeff James Superintendent N First Street Albemarle, NC RE: Constitutional Violation. Dear Mr.
September 24, 2018 Jeff James Superintendent Stanly County Schools 1000-4 N First Street Albemarle, NC 28001 jeff.james@stanlycountyschools.org RE: Constitutional Violation Dear Mr. James, Our office was
More information90 South Cascade Avenue, Suite 1500, Colorado Springs, Colorado Telephone: Fax:
90 South Cascade Avenue, Suite 1500, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80903-1639 Telephone: 719.475.2440 Fax: 719.635.4576 www.shermanhoward.com MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Ministry and Church Organization Clients
More informationAn exploration of school leadership issues relating to the December Dilemma
Journal of Case Studies in Education An exploration of school leadership issues relating to the December Dilemma ABSTRACT Anna L. Fox University of Mary Hardin-Baylor Austin Vasek University of Mary Hardin-Baylor
More informationTale of the Monkey Trials: Chapter Three
Louisiana Law Review Volume 62 Number 2 Winter 2002 Tale of the Monkey Trials: Chapter Three Todd D. Keator Repository Citation Todd D. Keator, Tale of the Monkey Trials: Chapter Three, 62 La. L. Rev.
More informationTimeline: Remembering the Scopes Monkey Trial.
THE Monkey Trial Timeline: Remembering the Scopes Monkey Trial by Noah Adams July 05, 200512:00 AM http://www.npr.org/2005/07/05/4723956/timeline-remembering-the-scopes-monkey-trial Eighty years ago, in
More informationDecember 20, RE: Unconstitutional ban on employee Christmas decorations deemed religious
Post Office Box 540774 Orlando, FL 32854-0774 Telephone: 407 875 1776 Facsimile: 407 875 0770 www.lc.org 122 C St. N.W., Ste. 360 Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: 202 289 1776 Facsimile: 202 216 9656 Reply
More informationWhat Everyone Should Know about Evolution and Creationism
What Everyone Should Know about Evolution and Creationism Science is a way of discovering the causes of physical processes - the best way yet conceived. Scientific theories are critically tested and well
More informationA Textbook Case THE TEACHING OF EVOLUTION: BSCS RESPONDS TO A STUDENT'S QUESTIONS
A Textbook Case [After some spirited debate between myself and Robert Devor (a science teacher from a high school in Texas), I received a Xerox of the following article from BSCS, a textbook publishing
More informationConstitutional Rights of Students, Teachers, and Public Schools to Seasonal Religious Expression
1-800-835-5233 MEMORANDUM Constitutional Rights of Students, Teachers, and Public Schools to Seasonal Religious Expression Historically, students and teachers across America have freely celebrated the
More information1-800-TELL-ADF MEMORANDUM. Constitutional Rights of Students, Teachers, and Public Schools to Seasonal Religious Expression
1-800-TELL-ADF MEMORANDUM DATE: Christmas 2011 FROM: RE: Alliance Defense Fund Constitutional Rights of Students, Teachers, and Public Schools to Seasonal Religious Expression The Alliance Defense Fund
More informationDeck the Hall City Hall That Is
Deck the Hall City Hall That Is Is it constitutional for cities to erect holiday displays that contain religious symbols? 1 The holiday season is here, and city hall is beautifully covered in festive decorations.
More informationScience and Ideology
A set of ideas and beliefs: generally refering to political or social theory Science and Ideology Feyerabend s anarchistic view of science Creationism debate Literature: Feyerabend; How to defend society
More informationIs Darwinism Theologically Neutral? By William A. Dembski
Is Darwinism Theologically Neutral? By William A. Dembski Is Darwinism theologically neutral? The short answer would seem to be No. Darwin, in a letter to Lyell, remarked, I would give nothing for the
More informationI write separately to note certain aspects of the. legislative history, and to emphasize that nothing in the
.!. ~ ~-~~ ~~r ~ ~~ ~ 85-1513, Edwards v. A9uil1ard ~!-- IJ>,-v'l-r--~ SECOND DRAFT yv 5 ~.v ~ ~ ~~~. """~~ 9 fl p.fl
More informationJune 11, June 11, I would appreciate your prompt consideration of this opinion request.
Scott D. English, Chief of Staff Office of the Governor Post Office Box 12267 Columbia, South Carolina 29211 Dear : You request an opinion regarding the constitutionality of H.3159, R-370 which is, as
More informationPerception and Practice: The Wall of Separation in the Public School Classroom. Patricia A. Tinkey Ed.D.
Perception and Practice: The Wall of Separation in the Public School Classroom Patricia A. Tinkey Ed.D. The concept of separation of church and state is first credited to Thomas Jefferson in 1802. Because
More informationJune 5, Ralph Hobratschk President, Board of Trustees Friendswood ISD 302 Laurel Dr. Friendswood, TX Fax: (281)
June 5, 2008 Ralph Hobratschk President, Board of Trustees Friendswood ISD 302 Laurel Dr. Friendswood, TX 77546 Fax: (281) 996-2513 Re: Unconstitutional Muslim Indoctrination at Friendswood Junior High
More informationCitation: 90 Ky. L.J Provided by: Available Through: David C. Shapiro Memorial Law Library, NIU Colleg
Citation: 90 Ky. L.J. 1 2001-2002 Provided by: Available Through: David C. Shapiro Memorial Law Library, NIU Colleg Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Mon Jun 27 15:37:39
More informationNo In The Supreme Court of the United States. On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
No. 02-1624 In The Supreme Court of the United States ELK GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, and DAVID W. GORDON, Superintendent, v. Petitioners, MICHAEL A. NEWDOW, et al., Respondents. On Writ of Certiorari
More information1/18/2009. Signatories include:
We are skeptical of claims for the ability of the action of an invisible force operating at a distance to account for dynamics. Careful examination of the evidence for the Newtonian Theory should be encouraged.
More informationA study of the religious orientation of public school districts located in the Bible Belt of the United States
Journal of the European Teacher Education Network 2014, Vol. 9, 12-21 A study of the religious orientation of public school districts located in the Bible Belt of the United States Tom Bennett and George
More informationTaken to School: An Interview with the Honorable Judge John E. Jones, III
Interview Taken to School: An Interview with the Honorable Judge John E. Jones, III Jane Gitschier* Departments of Medicine and Pediatrics, Institute for Human Genetics, University of California San Francisco,
More informationTook a message from the Associated Press in New Orleans about this also. Can imagine all stations will be calling or trying to visit the school.
From: HUGHES Subject: RE: KSLA inquiry Date: February 24, 2014 at 11:52 AM To: MAINIERO, VICTOR /O=CADDOSCHOOLS/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP /CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=VMAINIERO Cc: DAIGLE, BRUCE /O=CADDOSCHOOLS/OU=EXCHANGE
More informationTHE RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE
THE RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE INTERNATIONAL HEADQUARTERS Post Office Box 7482 Charlottesville, Virginia 22906-7482 JOHN W. WHITEHEAD Founder and President TELEPHONE 434 / 978-3888 FACSIMILE 434/ 978 1789 www.rutherford.org
More informationPRAYER AND THE MEANING OF THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE: A DEBATE ON TOWN OF GREECE V. GALLOWAY
PRAYER AND THE MEANING OF THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE: A DEBATE ON TOWN OF GREECE V. GALLOWAY Patrick M. Garry* I. Introduction... 1 II. The Short Answer: Marsh Supports the Prayer Practice... 2 III. The
More informationUNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW JOINT SUBMISSION 2018
NGOS IN PARTNERSHIP: ETHICS & RELIGIOUS LIBERTY COMMISSION (ERLC) & THE RELIGIOUS FREEDOM INSTITUTE (RFI) UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW JOINT SUBMISSION 2018 RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN MALAYSIA The Ethics & Religious
More informationA CHRISTMAS CAROL IN THE PARK FROM THE SUPREMES
A CHRISTMAS CAROL IN THE PARK FROM THE SUPREMES James C. Kozlowski, J.D. 1985 James C. Kozlowski In the recent case of Lynch v. Donnelly, 104 S.Ct. 1355 (1984), the Supreme Court of the United States considered
More informationIntelligent Design. What Is It Really All About? and Why Should You Care? The theological nature of Intelligent Design
Intelligent Design What Is It Really All About? and Why Should You Care? The theological nature of Intelligent Design Jack Krebs May 4, 2005 Outline 1. Introduction and summary of the current situation
More informationDrew Whelan. Volume 9 Issue 2 Article 8
Volume 9 Issue 2 Article 8 2002 The Show Must Go on as Academic Freedom Saves the Day: But Where Does Academic Freedom End and the Establishment Clause Begin and Has the Seventh Circuit Restricted the
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA HERB FRBILBR, SAM SMITH, and JOHN JONES versus TANGIPAHOA PARISH BOARD OF EDUCATION, E.F. BAILEY, ROBERT CAVES, MAXINE DIXON, LEROY HART, RUTH
More informationEdwards v. Aguillard: The Lemon Test Yields Bitter Fruit for Traditional Religious Values, 21 J. Marshall L. Rev. 613 (1988)
The John Marshall Law Review Volume 21 Issue 3 Article 8 Spring 1988 Edwards v. Aguillard: The Lemon Test Yields Bitter Fruit for Traditional Religious Values, 21 J. Marshall L. Rev. 613 (1988) John R.
More informationWhere Do You Stand: Critical Conversations about Religion in Public Schools
Where Do You Stand: Critical Conversations about Religion in Public Schools The College at Brockport s 12 th Annual Diversity Conference Building Community through Diversity SPIRITUALITY, STATE AND POLITICS
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 12-696a IN THE Supreme Court of the United States MARTIN COUNTY AND MARTIN COUNTY BOARD, Petitioners, v. ANNE DHALIWAL, Respondent. On Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The
More information