It has never been illegal to teach Creation Science in public schools. All through the 1800's and even into the 1900's the Bible was used in public schools for various reasons. The evolution religion is what crept in later but Creation Science has never been made illegal. It's only illegal to forcefully try and convert one's religious beliefs on students but it is perfectly fine to teach about creation.
The evolutionist Steven Jay Gould said,
"no statute exists in any state to bar instruction in 'creation science.' It could be taught before, and it can be taught now"
---The Verdict on Creation Science, New York Times July 19, 1987, p.34
Evolutionary biologist Micheal Zimmerman said,
"The Supreme Court ruling did not, in any way outlaw the teaching of 'creation science' in public school classrooms. Quite simply it ruled that, in the form taken by the Louisiana law, it is unconstitutional to demand equal time for this particular subject. 'Creation science' can still be brought into science classrooms if and when teachers and administrators feel that it is appropriate. Numerous surveys have shown that teachers and administrators favor just this route. And, in fact, 'creation science' is being taught in science courses throughout the country."
---"Keep Guard Up After Evolution Victory." BioScience 37 (9, October 1987):636
President of NCSE, Eugenie Scott said,
"The Supreme Court says only that the Louisiana law violates the constitutional seperation of church and state: It does not say that no one can teach scientific creationism--and unfortunately many individuals do. Some school districts even require 'equal time' for creation and evolution."
--National Center for Science Education, Nature 329 (1987):282.
Evolutionist William B. Provine said,
"Teachers and school boards in public schools are already FREE under the Constitution of the USA to teach about supernatural origins if they wish in their science classes. Laws can be passed in most countries of the world requiring discussion of supernatural origins in science classes, and still satisfy national legal requirements. And i have a suggestion for evolutionists. INCLUDE discussion of supernatural origins in your classes, and promote discussion of them in public and other schools. Come off your high horse about having only evolution taught in science classes. The exclusionism you promote is painfully self-serving and smacks of elitism. Why are you afraid of confronting the supernatural creationism believed by the majority of persons in the USA and perhaps worldwide? Shouldn't students be encouraged to express their beliefs about origins in a class discussing origins by evolution?"
--Biology and Philosophy 8(1993):124
Now let's see what some of the cases say!
In the landmark ruling of School District of Abington Towship v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 225,(1963)the court held that,
"it certainly may be said that the Bible is worthy of study for literary and historic qualities. Nothing we have said here indicates that such study of the Bible or of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, may be effected consistently with the First Amendment."
In 1980 The Supreme Court said,
"the Bible may constitutionally be used in an appropriate study of history, civilization, ethics, comparative religion, or the like."
--Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39, 42(1980)
In 1987,
"Teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of mankind to school children might be done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction. Teachers already possess the flexibility to present a 'VARIETY of scientific theories about the origins of humankind'...and are 'FREE TO TEACH ANY AND ALL FACETS OF THIS SUBJECT."
--Edwards vs. Aguiliard, 482 U.S. 96(1987) p.14
As for Kitzmiller v. Dover,
"to preserve the separation of church and state mandated by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment … , we will enter an order permanently enjoining defendants 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."
Simply put, in that case the court ruled against requiring teachers to teach the faults in evolution. It also ruled against REQUIRING the teaching of Creation. That DOES NOT mean it cannot be taught.
I hope this clears up any confusion people may have about the law and the Bible. Our aim is get the lies out of the textbooks that support the Religion of Evolution. Truly, a class on origins should either discuss all the theories or none.
