펜실베니아에서 지적설계론을 과학교과과정에 포함시켜 가르치는 것을 의무화하는 학교당국의 규정은 위헌이라는 판결이 나왔다. 판결문의 전문은 여기에서 읽을 수 있다.
중요한 부분만 인용하면,
The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board’s ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents.
Both Defendants and many of the leading proponents of ID make a bedrock assumption which is utterly false. Their presupposition is that evolutionary theory is antithetical to a belief in the existence of a supreme being and to religion in general. Repeatedly in this trial, Plaintiffs’ scientific experts testified that the theory of evolution represents good science, is overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the existence of a divine creator.
To be sure, Darwin’s theory of evolution is imperfect. However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions.
The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy.
With that said, we do not question that many of the leading advocates of ID have bona fide and deeply held beliefs which drive their scholarly endeavors. Nor do we controvert that ID should continue to be studied, debated, and discussed. As stated, our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom.
바티칸도 이 판결을 지지하는 뜻을 밝혔다. 관련기사.
안타까운 일은 이번 판결로 인해 지적설계론만큼이나 과학적으로 우주탄생의 비밀을 설명할 수 있는 ‘날으는 스파게티 괴물’ 이론 역시 과학교과과정에 포함될 수 없게 되었다는 것이다.
날으는 스파게티 괴물 이론에 대한 설명은 나의 네이버 블로그의 이 포스트참조.