Speaking of evolution

A federal judge in Atlanta has ordered the state of Georgia to remove labels from the inside of its science textbooks that state the following: "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."

The court, in its order, declared that the labels unconstitutionally endorsed religion (!), even though they do not mention any other theory of the origins of life:

"[T]he Court believes that an informed, reasonable observer would interpret the Sticker to convey a message of endorsement of religion. . . . While the School Board may have considered the request of its constituents and adopted the Sticker for sincere, secular purposes, an informed, reasonable observer would understand the School Board to be endorsing the viewpoint of Christian fundamentalists and creationists that evolution is a problematic theory lacking an adequate foundation. . . . [T]here are some scientists who have questions regarding certain aspects of evolutionary theory, and the informed, reasonable observer would be aware of this also. On the whole, however, the Sticker would appear to advance the religious viewpoint of the Christian fundamentalists and creationists."

Incredibly, the Court then stated that "[t]here is no evidence in this [case] that the School Board included the statement in the Sticker that 'evolution is a theory, not a fact' to promote or advance religion." NO EVIDENCE! Nevertheless, it concluded that the sticker did promote or advance religion.

The Court went on to sat that "[b]y denigrating evolution, the school board appears to be endorsing the well-known prevailing alternative theory, creationism or variations thereof, even though the sticker does not specifically reference any alternative theories."

I think the judge presumes too much. Regardless of one's view on the labels, to assume they work as an "establishment" of religion, when they make no mention of religion or any religious theory of the origins of life, jumps the shark. The Court had no problem with the "critical study" portion of the sticker, but said that referring to evolution as a "theory" denigrated evolution. The Court, however, was playing semantics. It referred to evolution as a scientific theory.

For want of a word, the label was lost.