With a threat of a lawsuit looming, the Darby school board will meet Feb. 24 with an attorney affiliated with a legal defense organization founded to "keep the door open to the spread of the Gospel ... "
Lawyer Bridgette Erickson of Lincoln will talk to the board about the possibility of representing the school district should it be sued over its recent approval of a proposal to teach so-called "objective origins" in science classes.
"I'll be letting the board know a little more about ADF and how it works," Erickson said by phone Friday. "This is just preliminary discussion so they're more aware of ADF's services.
ADF's Web site includes this mission statement: "The Alliance Defense Fund is a servant organization that provides the resources that will keep the door open for the spread of the Gospel through the legal defense and advocacy of religious freedom, the sanctity of human life, and traditional family values."
The board became aware of ADF as it debated a proposal to teach "objective origins" in its science classes. Critics claim "objective origins" is little more than Christian creation science redesigned to pass constitutional muster.
Courts have been unkind to efforts to teach Christian creation stories as science, striking them down as violations of the establishment clause of the First Amendment.
However, the man who proposed the curriculum change, a Darby minister, and the three board members who voted for it say they have no religious motivations. They claim that "objective origins" is valid scientific criticism of evolutionary theory.
That claim is generally dismissed by mainstream scientists, but is nonetheless being pushed by a conservative Seattle think tank called the Discovery Institute. The theory promoted by the institute is called "intelligent design," which maintains that some forms of life on earth are too complex to be the result of evolution.
The proponents of the curriculum change say they're not pushing the teaching of intelligent design, although most criticisms they've suggested of evolutionary science has been generated by intelligent design theorists.
Before board members passed the proposal brought forward by Curtis Brickley, the attorney who represents them urged the board to submit any proposed curriculum to the state Office of Public Instruction. Otherwise, said attorney Elizabeth Kaleva, the district may have accreditation and funding problems because it will no longer be in line with state teaching standards.
Kaleva also told the board it opened up itself to a lawsuit if it passed a science curriculum that may blur the line between religion and science.
Despite Kaleva's recommendation, the board voted 3-2 in favor of "objective origins."
During the debate over the proposal, another Bitterroot Valley pastor, Harris Himes, of the Big Sky Christian Center, produced a letter from the Alliance Defense Fund. The letter offered the fund's assistance in defending the Darby school district should it be sued over "objective origins."
The board received an official letter from the fund's litigation staff counsel, Dale Schowengerdt, on Feb. 2.
"I have been authorized to extend to you ADF's commitment to defend the Darby School District if this policy is challenged in state or federal court, so long as such representation is not precluded by law," Schowengerdt said.
Erickson, who said she followed the Darby situation closely in media reports, said she subsequently discussed the possibility of representing the district with Schowengerdt, with ADF footing the bill.
Any such arrangement is still a long way off. For one thing, no one has sued the district yet, and such a suit may never come to pass.
Even so, the board will hear from Erickson about how ADF might become involved in the case should someone sue the district.
"Right now, it's just talking about possibilities," Erickson said. "For one thing, the board already has a very capable attorney in Ms. Kaleva."
Kaleva is also expected to attend the Feb. 24 meeting.
Erickson said Friday that she believes the Darby proposal would, in general, survive a constitutional challenge, in part because the policy only "encourages" teachers to instruct students on criticisms of current scientific theory.
"With regard to what some might see as loose language, I think the encouragement part lends some defensibility to the policy," Erickson said. "If it were mandatory, then there might be something more to argue about."
Reporter Michael Moore can be reached at 523-5252 or 370-3330, or by e-mail at mmoore@missoulian.com.
|
 |
 |
Add your comment now! Write your comment in the form below.
(Email address is for verification only. If you'd like to email a story, look for the link above)