Teaching the Origins Controversy: Science, or Religion, or Speech

David K. DeWolf

Document Type

Article

Publication Title

Utah Law Review

Abstract

This article will attempt to clarify what the law does allow teachers to teach in their biology classrooms. In the process, it will answer three key questions necessary to deciding the legal status of Spokes's proposed curriculum. These are:

Is It Science? Are Spokes's intended changes in his biology curriculum scientific? Is his plan to correct and critique textbook presentations of neo-Darwinism scientific? Are the alternative theories that Spokes wants to present (including the theory of intelligent design) scientific?

Is It Religion? Does Spokes's plan to correct and critique textbook presentations of neo-Darwinism constitute an establishment of religion? Does Spokes's plan to expose his students to evidence of design and design theory qualify as teaching religion? Does the First Amendment prevent the presentation of this point of view?

Is It Speech? Do Spokes's plans to correct and critique textbook presentations of neo-Darwinism, and to expose students to the alternative theory of intelligent design, enjoy protection under the First Amendment, either in the prohibition of viewpoint discrimination, or as an exercise of academic freedom?

First Page

39

Last Page

110

Publication Date

2000

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS