It’s that darned Bill of Rights, again. Religious freedom means you can’t preach in public schools.
Well, that’s the way the Bill of Rights has been interpreted by the United States Supreme Court.
But James Madison originally wrote the Bill of Rights to **protect the states **from the power of the Federal Government.
And then the Justices, I think starting in the 1930s / 40s (especially under Earl Warren in the 1950s), then later in the 1960s and 1970s began to interpret the 14th Amendment (which was written soon after the American Civil War) as “incorporating” the Bill of Rights **against the states themselves **and curtailing state power.
So, the 4th Amendment, the one that prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures, became applied against all the states.
So did the amendment that prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, and then the First Amendment with its “Establishment Clause” was interpreted as being “incorporated” **against the states **in the 14th Amendment.
Basically, the Supreme Court said the words “due process” found in the 14th Amendment’s text includes and incorporates the Bill of Rights.
Now, that’s just some men’s personal interpretations of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Another group of men and women appointed to the Supreme Court could have interpreted the 14th Amendment very differently.
That is is a rather very broad interpretation, if you study it.
And that interpretation does not necessarily mean it is a correct interpretation.
Also, a lot of these U.S. Supreme Court Justices were Freemasons; sounds like they are imposing their Freemasonry on every American citizen in the United States: Justices Hugo Black, Stanley F. Reed, William O. Douglas, James F. Byrnes, Robert H. Jackson, Wiley B. Rutledge, Harold H. Burton, Frederick M. Vinson, Thomas C. Clark, Sherman Minton, Earl Warren, John M. Harlan, Thurgood Marshall, John M. Harlan, and Potter Stewart were all Freemasons.
That’s 15 / 20 of the U.S. Justices appointed between 1932-1962 (I think that is about the right number).
Talk about Equal Justice Under Law; sounds like a Lodge meeting to me.
Source: H. Paul Jeffers: Freemasons: Inside The World’s Oldest Secret Society, Citadel Press: Kensington Publishing Corp, New York, 2005 (pp. 213-221).
And public schools, at least in theory, were supposed to be controlled on a local basis and the Federal Government was not supposed to get involved (even today, the Federal Government minimally funds public education; they are state run and local School Board run institutions).
Because science is always growing, science teachers barely have time to get the basics of science down. If the English department can’t get it on their own, science isn’t going to help them.
Well, I sincerely doubt that is the case.
The man who taught my Physics course in high school also coached the school’s baseball team, so it seemed like he had plenty of time to take something else up (my understanding is these coaching jobs are basically an part-time job for public school teachers who want to earn some extra money to supplement their salary as a teacher).
And the Physics textbook we had was about 15-20 years old.
I don’t remember seeing this man reading science books, magazines, or journals, or having them on his desk.
If you’ve ever watched Carl Sagan’s “Cosmos” or Jacob Bronowski’s “Ascent of Man” BBC series (from the 1970s), you’ll see that real, professional scientists are interested are interested in all areas of human knowledge, including history, Bible, art, music, drama, poetry, anthropology, archeology, and so on.
A science teacher even showed one of the final episode’s of Sagan’s “Cosmos” in a public school science class: the one where he is flying on a spaceship through space, listening to Elvis music, and seeking things to include in a hypothetical “Encyclopedia Galactica”, a proposed encyclopedia containing all aspects of human knowledge, recorded for posterity.
I know it is an educational TV show (for PBS) and not a classroom, but on these shows these professional scientists commented on all areas of human knowledge, even the Bible and the Catholic Church, too.
And “Cosmos” was shown in public schools (if anyone went to school in the 1970s or 1980s, did your science teacher show episodes of “Cosmos” on video to you in your class??).
My teacher only showed that last episode.
But Sagan does talk about Evolution in one episode, and he looks right into the camera and says “Evolution really happened; it is a fact,” and he skips any discussion of religion’s responses to evolution; though in a different episode on the rotation of the planets, he satirizes the Bible saying some “unerring stenographer” wrote it down while God dictated it to him; and he talks a lot about the Catholic Church, and Catholic doctrine while discussing Gallileo, as does Jacob Brownowski in his series “The Ascent of Man.”
So, the Professor of Astronomy Sagan (Carl Sagan was a Professor of Astronomy at Cornell University) and professional Physicist Bronowski do discuss religion into their scientific TV episodes, but in order to promote disbelief, these scientists skip the response of religion to Darwin, while they are more than pleased to discuss Catholic theology in their talks on Galileo and Copernicus.
Maybe next year they’ll have a pagan celebration and glorification of Copernicus, or William Harvey, or Einstein, or Gregor Mendel.
No, I doubt it. I admit I haven’t paid too much attention to this school since I graduated, but they had nothing like this during the years when I went to school there.
They skipped the 500th anniversary of Columbus discovering the New World.
No, these guys just like Darwin. And I bet they never have another university-wide focus on a great thinker ever again.
No “Shakespeare Year” forseeable in the future.
Also, this is not just one department of this university sponsoring these discussions.
This is the primary intellectual focus of this entire university for the 2008-2009 academic school year: their “Darwin Year.”
Hmmm, I also like how Case Western encourages that all faculty teaching courses should try and include discussions of Darwin in courses they are teaching; this includes non-science courses.
This seems to contradict the thinking that states science classes should only focus on science, since this university wants its non-sience classes to discuss science, evolution, and Darwin.:rotfl:
The Reluctant Mr. Darwin (the book that the freshmen undergraduates are required to read) will be distributed to new undergraduate students during the summer.
Faculty will be encouraged to consider the reading, when appropriate, in designing course curricula.
Anyway, Catholic Answers had an article about this subject of religion and Darwinism at their homepage somewhere, and I’ll try and post it later when I get a chance.
It contained a lot of interesting information I had never heard about, including some statements that Pope John Paul II made on the subject; and I know Pope Benedict XVI has made some statements about evolution, too.
It also said that Pope Pius XII wrote a Papal Encyclical and commented on evolution in the 1950s.
Honestly, that is really the first time I’ve heard about that; I don’t think this particular Papal Encyclical has been mentioned that much on places like EWTN, or even Catholic Answers (though, it has been a while since I’ve listened regularly).
That’s a pity, because it should be.