[count-your-change]

I'm happy with having science taught and leaving religion to parents to provide for. What I find objectionable is evolution, which certainly has the characteristics of religion as much as intelligent design does, being force fed with no counter arguments permitted.

That makes it indoctrination of dogma, not science despite the reverence paid to Saint Darwin.

And you still haven't said how having a federal judge dictate to a local school board what is or is not religion in a local somehow is acceptable under the rubric “limited government”.

[allmendream]

Evolution is science. It contradicts your scriptural interpretation just as much as Geology contradicts belief in a global flood, Astronomy contradicts belief in a young universe, and gravity contradicts belief in geocentricism. Contradicting someones scriptural interpretation doesn't make something implicitly religious.

Judges need to enforce the limitations of government when those bounds are exceeded. Ruling that religious doctrine cannot be taught (and ruling that I.D. is a religious doctrine) is perfectly compatible with limited government.

Government deciding what religious precepts are correct and teaching religious belief and particular scriptural interpretations, at any level, is incompatible with the nation of religious liberty our founders envisioned.