What the?

I've returned from my Christmas break hiatus - please hold your applause. Since I'm back, I might has well come back with a bang.

Will someone please explain to judges what the First Amendment actually says?

For the record - anyone who reads me knows that I take my faith very seriously. However, I AM NOT a "creationist" (as used here, someone that accepts the Genesis account as the exact, literal, 100% scientifically factual explaination for the creation of life, the universe, and everything). I have too much of an analytical and scientific background to accept that fundamentalist reading of Genesis.

I do believe the Genesis account is true, meaning that God did indeed create everything, that all humans are created in his image and likeness, and that our sin has torn us away from his love.

That's just a disclaimer, because, in the end, whatever you choose to believe, it's pretty obvious this ruling is bunk:

"By 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," U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper (search) said.

The stickers were put inside the books' front covers by public school officials in Cobb County in 2002. They read: "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."

I challenge anyone out there...ANYONE...to take scientific issue with the statement that was printed on the sticker. If you are intellectually honest, you will not, because that it is easy to see that there ARE issues with using macroevolution to explain the origin of life. Microevolution is easily studied and recognized, but the theory of evolution fails to explain a fundamental question that almost all schools seem to ignore with abandon: "Where did life come from?" Evolution does not, and CAN NOT explain that question. I don't care what alternative theory you use (creationism, space seeding, etc) - evolution, as it stands right now, cannot explain the origin of life. That covers the "Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things." portion of the sticker. What about the rest? Is there anyone out there, regardless of religious beliefs, that doesn't think that any material studied should be done so with "an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered"? What's wrong with that? Aren't people telling those "religious types" to be more open minded all the time? Or is that just open minded when it comes to religion - we should just choke down what some people are trying to force feed us even if we don't agree with it?

But more importantly - how does that printed statement violate the First Amendment? For those that need a refresher:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, ...

Say it with me boys and girls - establishment. Es-tab-lish-ment. ESTABLISHMENT!!!! How in the freaking world does saying "Evolution is a theory, study it with an open mind" ESTABLISH A RELIGION?!?!?!??! Seriously, the left half of my brain is looking at the right half and is saying "it's dark in here...and we may die." And here's my favorite quote from the story:

"This is a great day for Cobb County students," said Michael Manely an attorney for the parents who sued over the stickers. "They're going to be permitted to learn science unadulterated by religious dogma."

Will someone please explain to me how it's better to teach our kids unproven scientific dogma as fact instead of unproven religious dogma? Isn't it still a judgement on faith? Note, I'm not saying teach religion in schools. But the logical leap to get from "Evolution is a theory, study it with an open mind" to "religious dogma" is one that Evil Knievel wouldn't risk in the space shuttle.

Can we PLEASE get back to what the First Amendment really means? Does anybody out there really think that teaching evolution as a theory somehow establishes a national religion?