Judge Rejects Teaching Intelligent Design (New York Times (subscription required))
A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that it was unconstitutional for a Pennsylvania school district to present intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in high school biology courses because it is a religious viewpoint that advances "a particular version of Christianity."
・・・ということで、産経新聞でとりあげられたり、bewaadさんが厳しいつっこみをしていたのでご存じの方も多いかと思いますが、反進化論(Intelligent Design論)を学校教育で教えることは違憲という判断が連邦地裁で下りました。
Jones判事はBush大統領から指名された共和党員ですが、ID論に対しては、「創造説に別の名前をつけただけやんけ」("creationism relabeled")、「こんなん科学ちゃうで。これが科学やったら、科学の定義に超自然現象を加えるように修正せな」と、身も蓋もないことを言ったようです。
Judge Jones, a Republican appointed by President Bush, concluded that intelligent design was not science, and that in order to claim that it is, its proponents admit they must change the very definition of science to include supernatural explanations.
Judge Jones said that teaching intelligent design as science in public school violated the First Amendment of the Constitution, which prohibits public officials from using their positions to impose or establish a particular religion.
"To be sure, Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect," Judge Jones wrote. "However, 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."
なお、今後の行方ですが、実は先だって行われたPennsylvania州の教育委員会の選挙でも、ID論推進論者は席を失ってID論反対者にとって代わられたので、控訴はされずに判決は確定する見込みです。というわけで、ID論を学校で教えるという案は、少なくともPennsylvaniaについては完全に絶たれたようです。
これが最高裁までいくようなことがあれば、Roberts Courtの宗教的保守性を見るひとつの試金石になったんですが、その意味ではちょっと残念ですね。
Posted by 47th : | 11:57 AM
