Can Creation Science be Taught in Public Schools?

by Mathew D. Staver
Copyright © 2000

There was a time when the only theory of origins taught in public schools was that of creation. The Scopes trial challenged that monopoly. Today the tide has turned and now evolution monopolizes the public school classroom. Some mistakenly believe that the only theory of origins which can legally be taught in public schools is evolution. This assumption is incorrect. The Supreme Court has never indicated that creation science must be banned from the classroom.

This following briefly overviews the Supreme Court case of Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987), regarding the teaching of origins. The statute at issue in Edwards was the so-called Louisiana "Creationism Act" which forbade the teaching of the theory of evolution in public elementary and secondary schools unless accompanied by instruction in the theory of creation science. The Court struck down the statute because it could find no "secular purpose" to the Act. However, it is important to note that the Supreme Court in Edwards did not ban the teaching of creation science. Indeed, the Court acknowledged that teachers have the right to teach various theories regarding the origin of the universe. The Court stated the following:

The Act does not grant teachers the flexibility that they do not already possess to supplant the present science curriculum with the presentation of theories, besides evolution, about the origin of life. Indeed, the Court of Appeals found that no law prohibited Louisiana public school teachers from teaching any scientific theory. ... As the President of the Louisiana Science Teachers Association testified, ?[a]ny scientific concept that's based on established fact can be included in our curriculum already, and no legislation allowing this is necessary.? . . . The Act provides Louisiana school teachers with no new authority.

Id. at 587.

One of the reasons the Court struck down the Act was that it required curriculum guides to be developed for creation science but had no comparable requirement for evolution. The Court observed the following:

If the Louisiana legislature's purpose was solely to maximize the comprehensiveness and effectiveness of science instruction, it would have encouraged the teaching of all scientific theories about the origins of humankind. But under the Act's requirements, teachers who were once free to teach any and all facets of this subject are now unable to do so.

Id. at 588.

The Court also observed the following with regard to the teaching of various origin theories:

We do not imply that a legislature could never require that scientific critiques of prevailing scientific theories be taught. Indeed, the Court acknowledged in Stone [v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980)] that its decision forbidding the posting of the Ten Commandments did not mean that no use could ever be made of the Ten Commandments, or that the Ten Commandments played an exclusive religious role in the history of Western Civilization. In a similar way, teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind to school children might be validly done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction.

Edwards, 482 U.S. at 594.

A clear reading of Edwards v. Aguillard indicates that the Court stuck down the specific statute in question, in part, because of the stated intent by the statute's sponsor, Senator Keith. Additionally, the Act did not foster academic freedom because it required the development of guidelines only for creation science but not for evolution. The Court clearly acknowledged that teachers have the right to teach various theories about the origins of life, whether those origins be deemed evolution or creation science. Indeed, a secular purpose of teaching would be to promote academic freedom or the enhancement of science instruction by allowing teachers to teach various origins of life, and even critique various theories. A broad objective overview of the subject matter of origins is certainly constitutional.

For more information on what can be legally taught in public schools, refer to the book Faith & Freedom.

The information contained herein in not intended to render legal advice. Factual and legal issues may arise that must be considered in each circumstance. If legal advice is necessary, the services of a competent attorney should be sought.