The Fifth Circuit agreed with the trial court that the stated purpose of the disclaimer policy promoting critical thinking was a sham. Under Epperson and Aguillard a finding of a valid secular purpose for a school policy would have ended the matter. It didn t in this instance. In the view of the court, The primary effect of the disclaimer is to protect and maintain a particular religious viewpoint, namely belief in the biblical version of creation. The court offered three reasons for this conclusion.
None is persuasive.
First, the court noted that the school board s disavowal of endorsement of evolution is juxtaposed with urging that students contemplate alternative theories of the origin of life. Well, yes, but open minds seeking alternative explanations is at the heart of scientific inquiry. Ironically, the court adopted a secular stereotype of religion, in which religion is associated exclusively with leaps of faith rather than with Anselm s faith seeking understanding. The judges made their own leap here, asserting that promoting critical thinking about the origins of the universe must be equated with advancing religion. Second, the court thought the disclaimer policy advanced religion by urging respect for beliefs taught by parents regarding the origin of life.