Talk:Selman v. Cobb County School District

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is supported by the Intelligent design WikiProject.

This project provides a central approach to Intelligent design-related subjects on Wikipedia.
Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.

Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

[edit] Cleanup

I appreciate the work everyone did on this article, but it is not very well written. There was a lot of POV in the article, and I attempted to clean some of it up. I hope others can help too. Orangemarlin 23:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disgusted

This Whole Page is a absolute Joke!!! Does anyone here even know what the istablishment clause even says!? "Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion..." it Does NOT say anything about what schools may and may not put in their textbooks! Also, what made us jump to the conclusion that "Evolution is a theory not a fact" has anything to do with religion anyway! It doesn't even say anything about intelligent desiegn! According to the scientific method, evolution isn't even a theory! According to the scientific method if your theory has ANY enidence that contradicts it, than you have to go back and re-formulate tour hypothosis. --TheSoccerDude9119 (talk) 20:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

TheSoccerDude9119: this talkpage is not a soapbox or a forum for your naive and ill-informed rantings on the Establishment clause and Evolutionary biology. I would also suggest you take a look at Teach the controversy and Critical Analysis of Evolution, to explain why this label is creationist. Oh, and could you please post new threads at the bottom of the page. HrafnTalkStalk 05:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Can you tell me how my understanding of the istablishment clause is "ill-informed"? If i'm so wrong, why didn't you refute any of my "Rantings"? --TheSoccerDude9119 (talk) 17:47, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Read the article on the subject: Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Then take a look at the SCOTUS jurisprudence on the matter here. They will explain the complexities of the situation far better than I can, or should. This talkpage is for discussion of improvements to this article, not to rectify your deficiencies on the Establishment clause and Evolutionary biology. HrafnTalkStalk 18:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Also, SoccerDude9119, consider reading the Evolution FAQ. This reflects the consensus of editors at Talk:Evolution, and should answer many of your questions. --Hojimachongtalk 01:36, 22 February 2008 (UTC)