Did Judge Jones actually open the door to teaching ID in public schools?
|December 15, 2006||Posted by scordova under Intelligent Design|
Lauren Sandler in her book Righteous (p. 204-205) offered the following:
intelligent design proponents keep quiet about the idea that [Judge] Jones’s decision opens new legal support to teach thier views in philosophy and religion classes. “We do not question that many of the leading advocates of ID have bona fide and deeply held beliefs which drive their scholarly endeavors. Nor do we controvert that ID should continue to be studied, debated, and discussed….” Jones wrote, suggesting that intelligent design is a legitimate field of study outside biology class. This is a victory to an intellignt design movement…
no intelligent design group worth its salt supports Dover’s attention-geting bid for influence in the science classroom. Even the most brazen creationists groups, like Answers in Genesis–the name says it all–don’t approve of requiring teachers to deride evolution or direct students to Pandas [Of Pandas and People by Kenyon and Davis], since that’s just courting a lawsuit, and likely an unwinnable one….
Most [id-friendly] groups agree that the best way to convert a generation to the concept of intelligent design is to use stealth
Dang it, Sandler blew my covert plan of getting ID taught in philosophy and religion classes. See my covert discussion and correspondence with Eugenie Scott (which was publicly realesed with her blessing): My correspondence with Eugenie Scott.
45 of the 50 state constitutions in addition to the Declaration of Indpendence assert the existence of a Creator which has endowed us with inalienable rights. We can teach in public schools a survey of what the idea of Creator means. We can compare the concept of Creator in the minds of the constitutional authors with present day notions of the Creator and whether there is evidence (self-evident evidence) to support these constitutional views.
We can then compare the claims of the Darwinistic community against constitutional principles and matters of fact. After all Jones said in his landmark opinion: “ID should continue to be studied, debated, and discussed….” Way to go, Mr. “cut-and-paste” Jones!
See: Self Evident Truths
“Lauren Sandler obliterates the naive and complacent hope that keeps most secularists … sleeping peacefully at night”
Let me say for a change, I hope Sandler and Harris are right this time and that Jones ruling was a stealth victory for the ID movement.