[MHalblaub]

"Lacking specific legislation to inform it, what standing does the law have to define science? The same standing that it has to define school curriculum: none. The school board was within its rights; the judge was not."

A school board is not above the law. No school board can decide whether it's legal to punish students with a cane or not. Sometimes you need a judge to stop nonsense taught like rain is teardrops of angels.

A school curriculum is limited to some topics. You can't teach quantum electrodynamics at school level. Students won't even read that correct.

ID is at the moment only a philosophy without some scientific merits. You can't put every new or old idea in a school science curriculum. You can't teach every controversy at school especially there is non in the scientific world.

[Sun]

If you read the 1st amendment, you will see that our Founding Fathers did not want an established religion - that's it!

Our Founders would be shocked that a little curriculum change, like reading a one minute statement, would be considered an established religion.

Bill of Rights

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

[jboot]

A school board is not above the law...

Of course it isn't and nobody says that it is. The key to the argument is this: "Lacking legislation or established case law to inform it, the court has ZERO jurisdiction to establish curriculum". Can you point to a Pennsylvania law that says that "ID may not be taught in public schools" or "Only evolution may be taught in biology classes"?

You can't, of course. School boards are given tremendous leeway to set curriculum within the general standards established by the state. The "above the law" strawman is starting to rot a bit.

Don't like ID? Pass a law against it, if you can.