No, this is ridiculous!

Excuse me while I go shoot myself.

(Reguardless as to weather that is true or not) This is one screwed up world we live in.

Oh please.  One doesn't have to be "liberal" to see that this is the correct decision.

Do you see a sticker on your engineering textbook that says that "structural theory is just a theory and should be viewed with an open mind"?  How about a sticker on the psych book that says that "behavioral theory is just a theory..." etc.

Of course not.  In engineering class they teach engineering; in psych class they taech psychology; in biology class they teach biology.  If they want to teach evolution, they should go ahead - in comparative religion.

There are a zillion places stickers like this could have been put, but were not.  Evolution was singled out.  It is an obvious attempt by government officials to impose religious views on the public, and should be prohibited.

Legally speaking, this is a no-brainer.  They never had a chance.

Belt #2 wrote: (Reguardless as to weather that is true or not)

its whether not weather.(the smartest thing ive ever done)

Schools SHOULD have religion class, and they SHOULD teach creationism/intelligent design in those classes - but that is beside the point.

Science classes teach science.  Evolution is the current consensus scientific theory of the origin of species.  Therefore it is taught.  Period.

Are there potential challenges to evolution?  Sure.  But there are also potential challenges to linear algebra, harmonics theory, astronomy theory, quantum physics, and everything else in your science book.

Regardless of any particular perceived flaw in evolutionary theory, it has the backing of the scientific community, and is therefore taught in science.

In order for that sticker NOT to be illegal, the sticker would have to read "everything in this book is theory and should be judged with an open mind", and then that sticker should be on ALL science books, not just bio books.  There are plenty of other scientific theores taught in school with substantially less evidentiary backing than evolution.  None of these were stickered.

Therefore, this was an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment.  Simple.  Regardless of your personal views on evolution, this is blatantly unconstitutional.

Now, as to the merits of evolutionary theory itself, I would be happy to discuss those also, but that is a separate discussion from this discussion of the constitution.

But before we do that, I encourage you to read the transcript from the Scopes Monkey Trial and A Brief History of Time.  Both very educational on the beginnings of stuff.

TheHoff wrote: Snipa69 wrote: Im with Clark. I believe the right choice was made here. In my highschool there was a comparative religions class and the standard Biology class every sophomore had to take. If you put a sticker like that one in a Bio book, you may as well put one in the books for comparitive religion that state that they are not fact either; because let's face it, they aren't. The bible is stories about religion that have been passed down for hundreds and thousands of years. Anyone who has played the game Telephone where you sit in a circle and try to get one message all the way arround the circle without it being screwed up knows that things get lost in translation. But what about areas that have no religion class?  My school never did and never will have anything to do with religion.  We arn't even allowed to say the pledge because of "under God".  You hear a lot about rulings in court like this but it was the first time that B.S. directly effected me.  Hundreds of thousands of years is very inaccurate Snipa since the Bible is based on the world being made less than 5 thousand years ago.

First, i said Hundreds AND thousands, not of. Second, stickers placed on any text book that challenge the content of said book are stupid to even a logical standard. How seriously would you take that class if for every homework assignment you could just say "I didn't do it because of my views on biology. This sticker pretty much allows me to skip out on this class.'' I know many many people that would use such a loop-hole.

cdacda13 wrote: Belt #2 wrote: (Reguardless as to weather that is true or not) its whether not weather.(the smartest thing ive ever done)

It's great that you spend all of your time patrolling the forum for spelling and grammar errors, and everything...

But, quite frankly, I don't care how it's spelled.

"Weather" or "whether" It's all the same to me.

Quick, off to the nub and "idea's" forum, you have work to do!