Last week we wrote West Virginia Evolution Litigation, about a hilariously confused and misguided lawsuit claiming that evolution is a religion, and it was unconstitutional to teach it in the public schools of West Virginia.
The thing was so bizarre that we weren’t expecting any reaction at all from the usual creationist websites. But we were wrong. Casey Luskin, our favorite creationist, has just written this for the Discovery Institute’s creationist blog: Yes, Despite a Lawsuit in West Virginia, It’s Constitutional for Public Schools to Teach Evolution.
Verily, that’s one of the most amazing titles we’ve ever seen. What next — will Casey acknowledge that the world isn’t flat? Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:
A parent in West Virginia has filed a lawsuit claiming that “evolution is a religious faith” and that the teaching of evolution in public schools amounts to “the propagation of religion.” The parent, Kenneth Smith, is apparently representing himself and demands that “an accurate genetic independent investigator” be brought in “to declare the policy of evolution, as to be violating of United States Constitutional Amendments.” The lawsuit will go nowhere, and in all likelihood will be promptly dismissed.
We are stunned to find ourselves in agreement with Casey. But wait until you see what else he says:
Nevertheless, the plaintiff raises a question worth considering. Is it constitutional to teach evolution?
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! What a question! The Discoveroids are often entertaining — albeit unintentionally — but we never expected to find anything that amusing at their website. Let’s read on:
The answer, as we at Discovery Institute see it, is yes. Courts agree. Simply put, Darwinian evolution is a scientific theory and there’s nothing illegal in teaching about a scientific theory (however scientifically flawed) in public schools.
That may be the only time the courts agree with the Discoveroids. Or, as we see it, the Discoveroids are reluctantly going along with something they know they can’t fight. Casey continues:
[A]rguments that teaching evolution is unconstitutional have come up in various court cases over the years. This new case in West Virginia isn’t the first, nor probably the last. In each instance, the parties complaining that teaching evolution was unconstitutional lost. What follows is a summary of these cases.
You’ll understand if we skip Casey’s recital of various judicial decisions, even though they comprise the bulk of his post. Oh wait — at one point he says:
Out of all of its analysis, however, most striking is the court’s claim that even if evolution were taught “as fact,” this would “not transgress the establishment clause”: [quote from a court opinion].
Casey finds that “striking”? BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Then he tells us:
When it comes to simply teaching the scientific evidence supporting evolution (or the chemical origin of life), courts have decidedly held that this is constitutional. However, there are many ways to envision how evolution could be taught alongside atheism or materialism in a way that might violate the constitution, some of which I have detailed in this law review article.
Casey’s link is to an article he wrote for the esteemed Liberty University Law Review. We posted about it a few years ago in Casey, Corbett, Creationism, & the Constitution. Moving along:
Moreover, there are many scientific problems with neo-Darwinian evolution, and even though it’s legal to teach it in a dogmatic, pro-Darwin-only fashion, that’s not the best way to teach evolution.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! The Discoveroids know the “best” way to teach evolution. And al-Qaeda knows best how to teach Western Civilization. Another excerpt:
Rather than seeking remedies in courts, citizens concerned about the dogmatic and one-sided teaching of evolution should go to local or state boards to convince them that the best way to teach evolution is to teach it objectively, discussing both the pros and the cons.
Uh huh — and of course, that’s done by getting the states to adopt a law based on the Discoveroids’ Academic Freedom bill. One last excerpt:
School boards should do this not because they are (or fear they might be) compelled by a lawsuit. Rather they should enact such policies because they themselves agree that it is sound education policy and good science.
So there you are. This is a day to remember — the Discoveroids have acknowledged that evolution isn’t a religion that competes with their cult about the intelligent designer. Is that progress? No, they’re merely yielding to the unanimous holdings of numerous courts around the country that have all rejected what they would otherwise be claiming.
Copyright © 2015. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.