Law is a fascinating topic and an even more perplexing process. Though the law and its process were designed to provide clarity for issues which were not, I believe that sometimes the law creates more muddy water instead. The United States government has left the regulation of schools to the individual states and they have given liberal freedom to the individual school districts. As a result, districts will create policies and procedures that they see fit for running their school effectively. Unfortunately, the citizens of the district do not always see eye to eye with them and believe that the policies infringe upon their constitutional rights. Such is the case concerning Intelligent Design (ID). Intelligent design is a controversial concept
…show more content…
The court transcripts show how the system took time and effort to examine every aspect of the case. Some argue that the dissection of parts was too detailed. In this case there was a distinction made between the view of a student and the view of an adult. The views of students were divided to distinguish between younger students and older students with background knowledge of the historical context of things. This trial also clarified the difference between an average citizen and an informed citizen. The courts used only the informed citizen’s view to decide the legality of the inclusion of the statement. The courts then used much of the Board meeting transcripts and written records of other meetings to determine …show more content…
“Repeatedly in this trial, Plaintiffs’ scientific experts testified that the theory of evolution represents good science, is overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the existence of a divine creator. …The fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions” (Kitzmiller v. Dover district). Clarifying the timeline and judicial support of “good science” allows teachers in the CPS community to move forward without entrenching on the beliefs of
The court transcripts show how the system took time and effort to examine every aspect of the case. Some argue that the dissection of parts was too detailed. In this case there was a distinction made between the view of a student and the view of an adult. The views of students were divided to distinguish between younger students and older students with background knowledge of the historical context of things. This trial also clarified the difference between an average citizen and an informed citizen. The courts used only the informed citizen’s view to decide the legality of the inclusion of the statement. The courts then used much of the Board meeting transcripts and written records of other meetings to determine …show more content…
“Repeatedly in this trial, Plaintiffs’ scientific experts testified that the theory of evolution represents good science, is overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the existence of a divine creator. …The fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions” (Kitzmiller v. Dover district). Clarifying the timeline and judicial support of “good science” allows teachers in the CPS community to move forward without entrenching on the beliefs of