[Steve_Seattle]

I went to the full article, and it sounds like all the school board did was have teachers mention that there was an alternate theory to evolution known as intelligent design. So you advocate million dollar lawsuits every time a school district offers students an alternative viewpoint, and presents it as an alternative or minority viewpoint? Shall we also have million dollar lawsuits if school districts present students with alternative views on political philosophy, the cause of cancer, the importance of low-carb diets, or who really wrote Shakespeare's plays? This is complete insanity.

[antiRepublicrat]

I went to the full article, and it sounds like all the school board did was have teachers mention that there was an alternate theory to evolution known as intelligent design.

First, it's not a scientific alternate theory; second, their intent was religious. They shouldn't have had to perjure themselves under oath (and have the judge catch them at it) if they knew they were in the right.

[aNYCguy]

I went to the full article, and it sounds like all the school board did was have teachers mention that there was an alternate theory to evolution known as intelligent design.

No, the school board attempted to cloak their religious views in the guise of science, and teach it in school, which is constitutionally prohibited. A few things for you to consider:

1. ID is not a scientific theory. It was admitted under oath by Michael Behe, one of ID's guiding lights, that to consider ID science would require the definition of science to be broadened to include things like astronomy.

2. The board members were religiously motivated, and motive matters, despite the claims of certain legally clueless people that the law is entirely oblivious to motive.