The 1st Amendment is not about purging the sectarian ideas from the public sphere, from public institutions or from the public schools. The REVERSE is true - if it intends to secure free exercise of religions EVEN if it contradicts the doctrine of established Church of England or the correct scientific doctrine.
Free exercise is not free when it is restricted to the privacy of homes or religious buildings, while treated in the schools where the your minds are being formed as insidious plague.
For the free exercise of religion it does not matter whether this free exercise is restricted by the Archbishop of Canterbury or by the scientific authorities. The result is the same, and possible more severe in the second case, as scientific secular mindset appears to be more exclusive, intolerant, aggressive and better funded (by mandatory taxation paid by the believers too) .
I would say, if some county in Alabama wants to have Creationism be taught in schools it will not lead to the decline of America. America grew and prospered when the religion was present in schools. The spiritual vacuum created by secularism will be filled with "non religious" beliefs like sexual diversity, political correctness, feminism etc ... And in the end Islam might come.
No, but the 1st Amendment doesn't just prohibit the establishment of a state Church. It prohibits anything "respecting the establishment of religion." ID is a religion, and the school district was establishing it as its favored theory.
The 1st Amendment is not about purging the sectarian ideas from the public sphere, from public institutions or from the public schools.
I agree. It's about, among othing things, prohibiting public institutions from establishing sectarian religious doctrines as their official view.
Free exercise is not free when it is restricted to the privacy of homes or religious buildings, while treated in the schools where the your minds are being formed as insidious plague.
No one is saying it should be restricted to the privacy of homes. Students are free to express religious views in school, as are teachers so long as they do not attempt to pass them off as absolute truth in the classroom.
For the free exercise of religion it does not matter whether this free exercise is restricted by the Archbishop of Canterbury or by the scientific authorities.
How has exactly has free exercise been restricted?
The result is the same, and possible more severe in the second case, as scientific secular mindset appears to be more exclusive, intolerant, aggressive and better funded (by mandatory taxation paid by the believers too).
Nonsense. The only thing science is intollerant of is pseudoscience, like intelligent design.
America grew and prospered when the religion was present in schools.
That's because religion wasn't used as a pretext to teach pseudoscience.
I would say, if some county in Alabama wants to have Creationism be taught in schools it will not lead to the decline of America.
No. It would merely lead to the stunting of the intellectual development the county's students, as well as the loss of faith of the smarter ones who will realize that creationism is a crock.
The spiritual vacuum created by secularism will be filled with "non religious" beliefs like sexual diversity, political correctness, feminism etc ... And in the end Islam might come.
Nonsense. There are plenty of places for students to get religion besides biology class.
"America grew and prospered when the religion was present in schools."
Last time I checked, America was still growing and prospering even though religion is not present in public schools.