For the edification of my readers, let me show you the sum total of the text on the Understanding Evolution website that Larry Caldwell claimed in the lawsuit that the court dismissed earlier this year was unconstitutional:
“Evolution and religion are incompatible.”
Religion and science (evolution) are very different things. In science, only natural causes are used to explain natural phenomena, while religion deals with beliefs that are beyond the natural world.
The misconception that one always has to choose between science and religion is incorrect. Of course, some religious beliefs explicitly contradict science (e.g., the belief that the world and all life on it was created in six literal days); however, most religious groups have no conflict with the theory of evolution or other scientific findings. In fact, many religious people, including theologians, feel that a deeper understanding of nature actually enriches their faith. Moreover, in the scientific community there are thousands of scientists who are devoutly religious and also accept evolution.
For concise statements from many religious organizations regarding evolution, see Voices for Evolution on the NCSE Web site.
That’s it. That innocuous little snippet was what sent Larry into court claiming an establishment clause violation. Funny, most religious righters like him think there’s no establishment clause violation even if the school forces kids to say prayers against their will. Larry thinks it’s unconstitutional for a public university to even describe someone’s religious beliefs on a website. And now you know why Larry is viewed as something between a disgraced televangelist and a carnival barker.