What was the supreme court decision on evolution vs creationism?
147170
The Supreme Court ruled in 1987 that teaching creationism in science classes violated the establishment clause (Edwards v. Aguillard, ruling on a Louisiana law requiring the teaching of both evolution and creationism in science classrooms). \n\nTherefore, the right-wing religious community changed tactics, and is now frantically pushing "intelligent design" where there is no God mentioned (nudge nudge... wink wink). But in Kansas, the state curriculum board wanted to alter the definition of science to include supernatural processes. \n\nDoes not sound a lot like science to me...
566003
check out this website for way more info, but the key point, very simply, is that this case set the precendent for the supreme court to have the power to decide if the ruling of another court (like a state supreme court) is in line with the u.s. constitution - this is the basic idea of judicial review.  so, for example, if a state court created a law saying that there was an oficial religion for that state, the supreme court could make that hear the case and rule that law null and void because it goes against the constitution.\n\nlike i said, you'll get way more info at this site, so don't just base your knowledge of what i've said, it's more in depth
284525
There is no evidence for creationism (I used to study it), but you can focus your attention on a particular evolutionary period, specific animal species, adaptability with change in environment, or differences between macro and micro evolution. Professors seem to favor papers focusing in detail on a specific subject rather than a broad subject.
267210
The Supreme Court reviews all acts,laws,and statutes,and case opinions both with the federal and state in the American legal system.If the Court feels that the situation is unconstitutional it has the power to void it out.The Courts decision is final and stands supreme.Read the Bill of Rights (the Constitution). There are only a few to read.If you don't have access to a book do a search on the internet.Good luck and happy hunting.You can download e-books to help you with other similar projects in this field.I use to hate learning about government but, now that I am older it is more interesting to learn.Especially now that I know that I can have a positive say in this world as to how it is run since ,government effects everybody sooner or later.We have to think about our future and making it better.I too am studying government except mine is with criminal justice and wanting to help teens.
677385
Creationist stories were written to explain what could no be explained by science, specifically, where we came from.  Science has since explained this with the theory of evolution.  Evolution is what really happened; creationism was simply created to fill the holes until we figured it out.\n\nEvolution is a scientific theory that explains the origin of the diversity of species (note that it does not, and is not intended to explain the origin of life). The basic idea of evolution is that mutations result in genetic diversity in a population, and consequently different traits, and different selective pressures favor certain traits over others. In a diverse population, some individuals are better suited to the environment than others, and the individuals that are better suited are more likely to survive to reproduce and thus pass their genes on to the next generation. Consequently, the next generation will have more of the "good" genes and fewer of the "bad" genes than the generation before it. Because the environment is constantly changing, the definition of "good" and "bad" genes is also constantly changing. Something that used to be an advantage can become a disadvantage, and vice versa. More often, however, neutral traits will become either good or bad. Changes in environment can include not only changes in weather or resources, but also competition from other species.\n\nAs the environmental pressures change, the population of organisms changes with it. Over time, the little changes start to add up, and eventually the population will be so different from the ancestral state that it will be considered a different species. The diversity of species results from splitting of populations. If a population is separated by some geographical or reproductive barrier, the two subpopulations will likely evolve in different ways, to become two separate species. Eventually the two species may be reunited, but they will no longer be able to interbreed. Instead, they will compete with each other, and likely diverge even more.\n\nThe theory of evolution is supported by considerable scientific evidence, and is accepted by the vast majority of the scientific community. It is the ONLY scientific theory currently in existence that explains the diversity of species. Some people claim that "intelligent design" is an alternative theory for the origin of species. However, intelligent design is not a theory in the scientific sense. It is not supported by scientific evidence and can never be tested experimentally (not because we don't have the tools yet, but because it is theoretically impossible). Intelligent design provides an alternative to science, not an alternative scientific theory.\n\nScience is not about finding a single piece of evidence to conclusively prove a theory. It's about constructing theories to fit the existing evidence and gathering new evidence that supports or refutes existing theories. Evolution is supported by a preponderance of evidence. While no one point conclusively proves it, when all the evidence is considered in the context of existing scientific knowledge evolution is a well substantiated theory. Intelligent design is not.  What follows are brief explanations of some of the evidence that supports the theory of evolution.\n\n1. Vestigial structures\n\nOne example of a vestigial structure in humans is the appendix. It has no function. Removing it is harmful only in so far as any surgery is associated with certain risks (so I wouldn't have it removed just for fun, but it's because of the surgery not the absence of the appendix). An appendix is found in several mammals. In humans it is small and has no known function. In rabbits and many other herbivores it is large and is used in the digestion of cellulose.\n\nAnother example of a vestigial structure is the hipbones of snakes. Snakes evolved from quadrupeds, and some species still retain not on pelvises, bu
376023
I think the Catholic Church doesn't like divorce but never asked America to ban divorce.\n\nI think this should be the model.  Government exists to protect people's different religions. \n\nWhen someone says I am going to consider my religious believes when they run for something, I am all for it.\nIts not a violation.\n\nWhen a person wants creationism taught in a science class in a public school, this is I think a violation of church and state, and recent court cases seem to think it unconstititional to teach creationism in science class.\n\nI think Jesus and creationism should be taught in something called comparative religion, maybe it should only be an elective, but we need to be able to present the option for people to learn to become culturally literate if they desire.\n\nThats just how I feel.
398979
Therein lies the basic conflict between creationism and evolution - In a creationist view, we are Ascended or above all other species, because we were created by God as the prime species on the planet. The governors of Earth and all it's lands and animals.\nIn an evolutionary sense, we descended from a common ancestor that is related to the plains' apes and gorillas, but diverged at some unknown time in the distant past, approx 5-7 million years ago. Evolution scientists are hunting for this missing link so they can prove that this is a fact - however - this missing link has not been found, and until it is - there is no hard evidence to back up a evolutionary claim.
988848
Creation THROUGH Evolution.  Both are correct in their own ways.  Believing in one does not exclude the other.
568570
The fact that evolution is a theory that makes sense and that has evidence that supports it.\n\nCreationism is an irrational belief of those who are afraid of science and do not wish to get in their any more information than  "god created and controls everything, that is all i need to know", personally i think shows weakness of mind.  Creationist thinking has no way to even theorize how "god", "heaven", "hell", etc. might exist, while evolution has facts that supports it.
72900
Al Gore.  Bush did win the electoral college.  What is interesting is the supreme court decisions in the bush v gore, the final one that ended it.\n\nIf you get a chance ever to read it its fascinating.  Essentially the arguement is made by the majority of justices that they aren't going to redo the vote in florida cause the discerning the intent of the voter is creating inequities amougnst the voters.\n\nIts the most fascinating thing from that whole era.  That and the "dont get snippy about it" from that night.\n\nI just read the supreme court case like two weeks ago.  Fascinating part and era of our history.
260278
There is physical evidence supporting evolution.  There is no physical evidence supporting creationism.
103694
depends...there are two types of creationists, biblical and intelligent design creationists. Biblical and religious creationists believe God created the humans and all otehr creatures as they are 5764 years ago. Intelligent Design believers say God created humans according to an intelligent design and we have evolved from there
408718
Why not both? They are not mutually exclusive. By making me choose between the two you are creating a false paradox. I could believe in God and Evolution or none of the above.\n\nAlso asking people if they believe in Evolution is like asking if they believe in gravity. It's a scientific fact, things evolve. However, the idea that life arose through evolution is an accepted theory but not totally a fact. So if you make me choose between the two I have to pick evolution because it's definately true.
99207
I believe the current argument is regarding teaching Evolution (or creationism/ID) in Science Class, not in school. The reason to teach Evolution in Science Class would be that it's a scientifically based theory with testable and measurable components. Creationism/ID has no basis in Science and is simply an attempt to insert Religion into Science by force.\n\nAttempts have been made by various religious groups to disguise Creationism as Science, with poor results (see Dover PA Board of Education). More info can be found here:\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_science
824483
How about Darwinism vs Creationism taught in schools, or stem cell research, or legalizing illegal immigrants who have been here for over 25 years? All of these issues are currently not answerable for lawyers and there is not a law that is consistant in all 50 states for any of them.
241235
are you kidding me?!? how on earth can you believe in evolution with so much proof of creation?!?!? before his death, darwin himself dennounced evolution and claimed creationism.
181146
The decision was based on the 14th amendment.  The case was Afroyim vs. Rusk and details can be found at:\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afroyim_v._Rusk