####Why the sticker? Because some people's faith is so fragile that they need such an affirmation? Sounds awfully liberal to me...####
Why not the sticker? You've agreed that the sticker would be truthful and scientifically accurate. Yet, you don't want to place them on the textbooks.
####Also, you are speculating on what WOULD happen. I could make plenty of "wouldn't" assertions, but you would (rightly) call me on it.####
We're all speculating to a degree. But here's why I think I'm correct in my speculation on this. You've agreed that it's true to state that science can say nothing about the existence or non-existence of God. Yet, any proposal to forcefully make that clear to kids in science class suddenly becomes controversial. You start questioning the motives of anyone wanting to provide the kids with this info. Why not just provide it to them? It's true, isn't it?
At the risk of belaboring abortion analogies, evolutionists are similar to those people who say they're personally opposed to abortion, but are "pro-choice". If you say to those people, "Okay, we'll leave abortion legal, but find ways to discourage it", they seem to have an excuse for opposing every means of discouragement. Suggest that we stop using tax money to pay for abortions, and they'll say it discriminates against the poor. Suggest that we fund crisis pregnancy centers that provide abortion alternatives, and they'll say such centers are "religious" and can't be funded. Suggest that teen girls need parental consent for an abortion (just as they do to get an aspirin or go on a field trip), and they'll say it would violate teen's "privacy" to require such consent.
In other words, they SAY they personally oppose abortion, but find some reason to be against any effort to curtail the practice.
Likewise, evolutionists agree that science says nothing about the existence or non-existence of God, but any suggesting I come up with for telling that fact to school kids (a sticker, a brief discussion of that issue, etc.) meets with disdain, and in fact would be blocked by the usual suspects (ACLU, federal judges, etc.).
Not all do. Some indeed claim that science disproves god.
Science certainly narrows down the range of possible gods. Science, for example, disproves a god who created the world in 6 days 6000 years ago. In fact, since science rules out particular divine possibilities, one could say science favors distant, noninterventionist deities.
So you sticker should properly read 'Science neither proves nor disproves the existence of some gods, but it does disprove the existence of others.'
So, we create a LAW to put a STICKER on science textbooks? That's a nice liberal touch. How about we do it in multiple languages, to accomodate our multi-cultural society? How about we NOT insitute any more affirmative-action plans instead? I know, I know: it's for the children....
While we're at it, let's put a sticker disclaiming (individually, of course, lest we offend) ALL philosophical questions that science can't answer.
But that still won't help the case for ID: stickers and abortion comparisons are not evidence.