Originally Posted by
Melendwyr
Showing that ID isn't good science - or even science at all - effectively demonstrates that there's no real secular reason to mention it in science classes.
But that's insufficient reason to
ban a practice under US law. It's
necessary to show that teaching ID "advances religion" in order for it to violate the Bill of Rights.
Fortunately, I think I disagree with your statement:
Quote:
Determining whether something is religious is quite difficult, as anything could potentially be taken on faith and made the centerpiece of one's religious convictions.
What you describe is essentially the definition of religion (as proposed by the Georgetown theologian whose name escapes me). If I can show that a substantial number of people have, in fact, taken "ID" on faith and made it the centerpiece of one's religious convictions" -- as Dr. Forrest testified, for example, in demonstrating how some of the ID proponents use John 1:1 as the
starting poing for their "investigations" of evolution and the origins of life -- if I can show that, then I've basically demonstrated that it's a religion.