United States District Court Middle District: Fill & Download for Free

When proponents of creationism sought to have this taught alongside, or instead of, evolution in public schools in the United States, the concept was rejected because it is religion, not science. They came back with the same concept labelled as ‘Creation Science’ — therefore a topic of science, or so they hoped.In 1982, a federal court determined that ‘Creation Science’ is not a science. Then, in 1987, the United States Supreme Court found that Louisiana's "Creationism Act", which required Creation Science to be taught in schools where evolution is taught, impermissibly endorses religion, also finding that the provision of a comprehensive science education is undermined when it is forbidden to teach evolution except when Creation Science is also taught.The Discovery Institute attempted to bypass the decision of the courts by proposing a concept called Intelligent Design. This proposes that an intelligent designer created our universe, but does not explicitly nominate the Abrahamic God as this designer. As identified by an internal document, the ‘Wedge Document’, leaked to the internet, the Discovery Institute anticipated that Intelligent Design would be taught as science in schools and at least a number of significant universities during the first decade of the current century. The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania ruled that Intelligent Design is not science and can not be taught as such in public schools.Scientists acknowledge evolution as an observed fact. They accept the Theory of Evolution, first proposed by Charles Darwin and subsequently updated, as a coherent explanation of the process by which evolution occurs.

Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia…“This claim, like Frankenstein’s Monster, has been haphazardly stitched together… This Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence. In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more.”Judge Matthew W. Brann of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, dismissing the Trump campaign’s attempt to block certification of Pennsylvania’s election result.

At first,when creationists sought to have creationism taught in the science curriculum of United States public schools alongside evolution, or even instead of evolution, the developed the name ‘creation science’ to make it appear that this was a science. It was made quite clear in ‘creation science’ that the Christian God was the creator, so there was no doubt that this was about religion, not science. The United States Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional for that reason.To overcome this objection, creation science was altered a little and renamed ‘Intelligent Design’. This involved removing the reference to God and its proponents claiming they were open as to who the Intelligent Designer was. On December 20, 2005, Judge Jones of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania issued a ruling that intelligent design is not science, and permanently barred the board from "maintaining the ID Policy in any school within the Dover Area School District, from requiring teachers to denigrate or disparage the scientific theory of evolution, and from requiring teachers to refer to a religious, alternative theory known as ID”.It is clear from this that the intention was to support a religious belief that the Abrahamic God designed and created the world.