CL.10 - Edwards v. Aguillard Louisiana's Balanced Treatment...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Edwards v. Aguillard Louisiana's Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science in Public School Instruction" Act under Establishment Clause If either is taught, however, the other must also be taught Community brought it to Court Secular purpose of presenting both sides of the argument with both theories Brennan It is equally clear that requiring schools to teach creation science with evolution does not advance academic freedom The Louisiana Creationism Act a religious doctrine by requiring either the banishment of the theory of evolution from public school classrooms or the presentation of a religious viewpoint that rejects evolution in its entirety Looks deeply into intent of the legislation (sincere and not a shame) Looks at Epperson, there is history and context of religious purpose Scalia dissent Members of the Louisiana Legislature knowingly violated their oaths and then lied about it, for intent of secular purpose Shouldn’t be transporting previous idea of Epperson onto this case Would not suffice to invalidate the Act, so long as there was a genuine secular purpose as well Difference between motivation and purpose Motivation is more subjective and dealt with personally, purpose is more objective and
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 11/02/2009 for the course POLITICS CIVIL LIBE taught by Professor Kahn during the Spring '08 term at NYU.

Page1 / 3

CL.10 - Edwards v. Aguillard Louisiana's Balanced Treatment...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online