But you missed my first post on the matter. If a teacher or student brings up the point that Darwin proves there is no God then a student has a right to bring up ID as a matter of opinion to fight back. Since a teacher or student bringing up an opinion that Darwin proves God doesn't exist is exactly that. An opinion.
If a teacher or student brings up the point that Darwin proves there is no God ...
I've seen Dawkins accused, inaccurately, of saying this. But what is it doing in a science class; it's a theological question, not a scientific one.
a right to bring up ID as a matter of opinion to fight back.
Huh? Why wouldn't showing that the ToE is silent about theology suffice? ID adds nothing to the discussion.
And anyway, the case at hand wasn't anything like the scenario (aka a straw man) you're discussing; Dover was trying to require the teachers to lie to children by saying that ID is scientific, when, as the judge found, it isn't.
You clearly don't show any understanding of what I'm talking about. I'm not arguing with you so there isn't a possiblity of a strawman arguement. Perhaps you just don't understand what goes on in classrooms these days.. or perhaps you never spent time in a science class. Either way what we are talking about is what is acceptable for teachers to teach. Clearly ID isn't scientific. But teachers saying that Darwinism proves that God doesn't exist isn't here. And if you don't think that's going on in today's science classes you need to take the blinders off.