Bush Doctrine

Evolution must only be taught as scientific fact. Creationism may not be taught as science under any circumstances.

May a public school science teacher's right to teach evolution be restricted?
No. The United States Supreme Court has determined that it is unconstitutional to restrict an educator's right to teach evolution.

May a science teacher who teaches evolution also teach creationism? No. Educators may not teach, as fact, the theory that humankind was created by a divine being. In science classes, educators must present only scientific explanations for life on earth and scientific critiques of evolution. Furthermore, schools may not refuse to teach evolution in an effort to avoid offending religious individuals. The United States Supreme Court has held that it is unconstitutional to require educators who teach evolution also to teach creationism.

In addition, disclaimers regarding the theory of evolution as the only explanation for the development of humankind have been found to be unconstitutional. In Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education, 185 F. 3d 337 (5th Cir 1999), cert. denied, 530 U. S. 1251 (2000), the court struck down a school board rule requiring teachers to read a disclaimer that said that the teaching of evolution is "not intended to influence or dissuade the Biblical version of Creation or any other concept."

May creationism ever be discussed in the public schools? Yes. Creationism may be included in classes on comparative religion as an example of how some religious groups believe human life began. However, creationism may never be taught as scientific fact.

Do scientific integrity and equity require that we teach a competing theory of human origins? Some have argued that equity, intellectual honesty and scientific integrity require the teaching of creationism as a differing and alternative point of view. However, creationism may not be taught as a response to the theory of evolution. Indeed, creationism (or "creation science") does not meet the tenets of science as scientists use the term. Moreover, it is not a matter of equity to teach a religious point of view in a public school classroom with taxpayer dollars.

Additionally, there is a growing movement promoting the teaching of "intelligent design theory" which asserts that the only reasonable explanation for the very complexity of the world and development of humans is the existence of God. This "theory," often couched in scientific terminology, is just another species of creationism, and thus also must not be taught in the classroom as scientific fact.

http://www.adl.org/religion_ps_2004/evolution.asp

Why should I vote for him?

The Jigsaw to Armageddon Yeah, folks, you can bet the ranch: we’re going in. I’ve heard all the arguments from the nay sayers, so let that go. We’re going in. This is déjà vu time, for sure, as we look back on the months before Shock and Awe, when so many of us tried to warn the nation about the coming catastrophe in Iraq. But those of us who shouted went unheard and those of us who marched in protest went unseen. Yet in the end we were right on the mark. And so, we’ll try again. This time, we’ll set out five easy pieces of a doomsday jigsaw puzzle that easily can be assembled if you take the time to do so. As in any such puzzle, the separate parts might be interesting, but not significant in themselves. But once assembled, the full picture emerges, where none could be seen before.