The Five Freedoms Project

You Be The Judge

Test your knowledge of the Five Freedoms and see how you match up to the courts...and fellow citizens.

February 2009

Creationism in Public Schools

Louisiana’s “Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science in Public School Instruction” Act required any public elementary or secondary school that taught evolution also to teach “creation science.” While the Act did not require evolution or creation science to be taught, it did stipulate that if either theory was presented, the other must also be taught. A group of parents, teachers, and religious leaders challenged the statute as an impermissible advancement of religion in violation of the Establishment Clause. The state officials countered that the legitimate secular purpose of the Act was to protect academic freedom.

May states require public schools to teach about both evolution and creation science?

Vote Now!

  • 31%
    A. YES
    If the vast majority of a state’s legislators vote to approve a bill that explicitly states a secular purpose, what is critical is not their wisdom in believing that a secular purpose would be achieved by the bill, but their sincerity in believing that it would be.
  • 34%
    B. NO
    Because creation science advocates a particular religious worldview, any mentioning of it in a public school setting is a violation of the First Amendment rights of students to be free of religious influences and imagery during the school day.
  • 35%
    C. NO
    The Act in question would not advance academic freedom, but stifle it by restricting what and how educators must teach. Teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind to schoolchildren is a good idea, but it should not be mandated by the state.

  • Incorrect

    This was the opinion of the two Justices who dissented in the case. As Antonin Scalia wrote, “Our task is not to judge the debate about teaching the origins of life, but to ascertain what the members of the Louisiana Legislature believed. The vast majority of them voted to approve a bill which explicitly stated a secular purpose.”

  • Incorrect

    Although the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prevents public schools from advocating one particular religious view over another, it does not outlaw all forms of religious expression. Teaching about creation science, therefore, would not automatically implicate the First Amendment, whereas teaching creation science as God’s law would.

  • Correct!

    In the 1987 case Edwards v. Aguillard, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that the Act was intended to promote religion. “Teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind might be validly done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction,” wrote Justice William Brennan. “But because the primary purpose of the Creationism Act is to endorse a particular religious doctrine, the Act furthers religion in violation of the Establishment Clause.”

Remember — US Supreme Court decisions outline "the law of the land."Lower court decisions do not. Sometimes, this means different lowercourts will issue contradicting opinion.

DO YOU AGREE WITH THE COURT’S DECISION? WHY OR WHY NOT?

Visit the Soapbox at network.fivefreedoms.org to share your voice!

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE COURT'S DECISION?

0 responses to Creationism in Public Schools

Add your own response.