Edwards v Aguillard was a 1987 Supreme Court case centering around the constitutionality of a Louisiana statue requiring that creation science be taught along side of evolution in the public schools.
             Evolution remains so controversial primarily because it is part of a larger debate over nature and the meaning of life. The study of how life began almost inevitably raises questions of why: Why did life begin? Why are humans rational? Why is there order in the universe? Men and women have debated these questions for thousands of years, considering them to be some of the most important inquiries human beings can undertake (Levy, Karst, West, 132).
             Is Creation Science scientific, irreligious, and factual, thus constitutionally permissible to teach in public schools?
             Can creation science be taught without promoting a particular religious belief, especially that human beings were created by a supernatural entity?
             Would academic freedom be gained by implementation of the act?
             Is the Balanced Treatment Act constitutional under Establishment Clause? Or does it have a non-secular purpose by promoting religion?
             Did the lower court make a procedural error when they made their summary judgment without hearing any of the state's evidence?
             Does the bill promote fairness and academic freedom by requiring that "all truths be heard"? Or is it merely a ploy to get Genesis back into the schools?
             Does the legislative history of the case demonstrate that it has a religious purpose or not?
             Are previous judgments of the court in favor or against the statute?
             Many notable figures joined in the case, demonstrating the on-going prominence of the issue of evolution many years after the 1968 Epperson v AR trial that attempted to make it illegal to teach evolution in public schools.
             ...