About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

19 Rutgers J. L. & Religion 25 (2018)
Evolution, Intelligent Design and the Establishment Clause

handle is hein.journals/rjlr19 and id is 25 raw text is: EVOLUTION, INTELLIGENT DESIGN AND THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE Roger L. Tarbutton* The teaching of intelligent design (ID:) in public classrooms as alternative or supplemental to contemporary evolutionary theory (_Neo-Darwinism:) has been widely rejected by courts on the ground that it is based on supernatural forces as opposed to scientific materialism. However, as recent advances in genetic and molecular science increasingly challenge the tenets of Neo-Darwinism, the teaching of non-random, intelligence-based alternatives should be permitted under the Establishment Clause provided such alternatives are supported by scientific evidence and are presented in a secular manner. Under existing case-law, the terms _creation science: and _intelligent design: are often conflated although creation science has historically been linked to biblical accounts of creation whereas ID encompasses non-random views of evolution. One judge concluded ID was a rebranding of _creation science: by religious zealots in an attempt to make it appear more scientific.2 I.INTELLIGENT DESIGN ANDTHE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE In Edwards v. Aguillard,3 the Supreme Court affirmed the holding of a Louisiana District Court that the Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science in Public School Instruction Act (the _Act: )4 Violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Act defined creation science and evolution science in terms of the scientific evidence and inferences supporting each and mandated theteaching of creation sciencein public schools as a viable alternative to the theory of evolution.' Although the Act did not require the teaching of either, it required that if one theory was taught so must the other. In a summary judgement decision, * University of Missouri at Kansas City, LL.M.; Washburn University, J .D.; Baker University, B.A. The author thanks the J ournal staff for publishing this article and for their editorial assistance. 2 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area Sch. Dist., 400 F. Supp. 2d 707, 716 (M.D. Pa. 2005). 3 Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987). 4 Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science in Public School Instruction Act, La. Rev. Stat. Ann. f 17:286.1-17:286.7 (1982). s Edwards, 482 U.S. at 578.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most