A federal judge finds a Mission Viego teacher (James Corbett) of violating the First Amendment by saying in class that Creationism is "superstitious nonsense."
Read all about it in the Orange County Register:
http://www.ocregister.com/...
What is most alarming is the convoluted reason the court(s) have taken on the issue of approving/disapproving of religion. It is insanely a violation of the 1st amendment if a representative of government takes a position disapproving of ALL religions, but if you happen to pick out one of them for offensitivity, that's OK.
It seems like several years ago, Sauter was about to fix this mess, but then backed away from it.
Are there any constitutional scholars out there who can make sense of this?