Can you believe this? This is amazing. I shoudn't be amazed.. because Phillip Johnson has been saying that this is what naturalists have been doing all along. They're saying that any challenge.. ANY challenge to evolution is eo ipso STUPID.The sticker was meant to be a harmless reminder. All it said was simply: “This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory and not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered.” Apparently, open-mindedness in Georgia is against the law. Placing those stickers inside the front covers of Cobb county biology textbooks is evidently a crime, according to U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper.
Six parents have sued the Georgia school board over the stickers, claiming that they advance a religious agenda. Judge Cooper agreed with the claim, stating that the labels did not have a “secular purpose,” and therefore were an unconstitutional violation of separation of church and state. An Associated Press (A.P.) news report noted: “A federal judge refused to dismiss a lawsuit against a school district’s practice of posting disclaimers inside science textbooks saying evolution is ‘a theory, not a fact’” (see “Georgia Evolution…,” 2004). Michael Manely, the attorney who represents the six Cobb county parents, said: “We’re very excited about this.” As well he should be. Only in America can we find a judicial system that would hear such a pathetic argument trumped up under the guise of “separation of church and state.”
The A.P. report goes on to note: “The lawsuit argues that the disclaimer restricts the teaching of evolution, promotes and requires the teaching of creationism and discriminates against particular religions.” With that in mind, let’s revisit exactly what the sticker says:
This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered.
And exactly what part of that was discussing religion? Exactly where did it mention creationism? In explaining why he made this ridiculous decision, the judge “noted that while the disclaimer has no biblical reference, it encourages students to consider alternatives other than evolution” Source
Nevermind that according to over 30 scientists, including 25 from Georgia, who have submitted a legal brief to the US District Court in the Northern District of Georgia, the courts should not prevent educators from encouraging students to approach the study of evolution with an open mind. (Source) That doesn't matter. Nevermind that many scientists and philosophers (for instance, William Dembski) are predicting that Intelligent Design will overtake Darwinian Evolution as the theory of choice among scientist within the next few years. That doesn't matter. Nevermind that Intelligent Design isn't creationism (For more on that, check out this and this, for starters). None of that matters.
What matters, aparently, is that in America we can sue for anything.. even the right to legislate the idea that the current reigning scientific theory about origins CANNOT BE CHALLENGED - that, in fact, we SHOULD NOT APPROACH IT WITH AN OPEN MIND - that, in fact, to do so is RELIGIOUS, CREATIONIST, PROPAGANDA.
Losers.
Debate topic: should the stickers be removed, why or why not?