Legalities of teaching "Intelligent Design"

Does intelligent design belong in public school?
Q&A with Erwin Chemerinsky, Duke University professor of law

". . . Erwin Chemerinsky, who joined the Duke University faculty in July 2004 after 21 years at the University of Southern California Law School, said the Pennsylvania school board policy violates the First Amendment.

Nearly 20 years ago, Chemerinsky said, the U.S. Supreme Court declared a state law unconstitutional that required that creationism be taught alongside evolution. Chemerinsky, named by Legal Affairs magazine as one of "the top 20 legal thinkers in America," recently answered several questions from staff writer Anne Blythe.

Q: What is the Establishment Clause, and how does it relate to this case?

A: The First Amendment prohibits the government from taking actions respecting the establishment of religion. The Supreme Court has said that this means that the government cannot act with the purpose of advancing religion, or with the effect of advancing or inhibiting religion, or have excessive entanglement with religion. . ."

-MORE-

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/2808926p-9253574c.html

the Establishment clause and the First Amendment against the Bush cabal, unfortunately logic does not always apply, especially now that a SCOTUS challenge would likely result in reversal.

My questions still go to using their own policies against them.

1) The Bush admin has consistently argued that Faith-based institutions can do things better than public institutions. If that is the case, then why are they encouraging the teaching of material traditionaly reserved by the faith-based institutions in public institutions? Does this mean the Bush administration doesn't believe the faith-based institutions are qualified to teach such material, if at all? Isn't this a significant flip-flop of policy?

2) The Bush administration has long contended that the key to better public education is more accountability. Unfortunately, however, there is no item in the Federal Education Department list of Standards and Skills regarding Intelligent Design and/or Creationism. How can the Bush administration support, much less encourage such use of human and physical capital on the part of school districts where such teaching is "off the record" and cannot adequately measure the academic performance of students enrolled in those courses? While states and districts are free to exceed the requirements of NCLB, I am curious as to the wisdom of doing so without State and Federal accountability of such programs. Isn't education without accountability a flip-flop of policy?

DBDB

if they can get ID "allowed" - it'll be a short step to being required by the NCLB........