When you open your mouth and claim you got science and you end up in court and produce nothing, it means you truely have nothing. When the court uncovers that lies regarding peer review and lies regarding motivations, you don't look very intelligent. Zeitgeist ain't and excuse, neither is presription drug use for perjury.
The court determined the product was defective, not science and entirely backed by religious motivations. Such religiously motivated junk science doesn't belong in the science classroom. That includes honoring it, by allowing an official school board statement, indicating it is a valid scientific theory and alternative to the bulk of biological science.
Also, at the HS classroom level, such discussions are inappropriate for anything other than brief chit chat, because the subject is above their heads. School at this level is not for discussion of these topics. It is for training and not wasting time on junk science.
To scientists it's okay to have magic spells, so long as it's the ACLU that's casting them.
Spoken like a true elitist.
I still want to know why state courts can tell local schools what they may teach and how they may teach it. And I don't personally care much for ID, per se, or what I've learned about it. I agree it probably isn't science, but neither do I believe in 'Science Uber Alles'.
There is room for asking about the purpose of life, even in the high school classroom, is there not? Why do you assume such thoughts are 'above their heads'? I was asking precisely these questions when I was in high school, and I am not eager to see any orthodoxy presented in an atmosphere that does not allow difficult questions.
Do you wish to hermetically seal off science from other disciplines and competing world views? It seems that you do.