Place your order

Fill in the order form and provide all details of your assignment.

Proceed with the payment

Choose the payment system that suits you most.

Receive the final file

Once your paper is ready, we will email it to you

Please respond to this prompt: In Edwards v. Aguillard the Supreme Court said a

AMAIZING OFFER GET 25% OFF YOUR FIRST ORDER CODE FIRST25

Please respond to this prompt: In Edwards v. Aguillard the Supreme Court said a statute requiring the teaching of “Creation Science” endorses a particular religion and is unconstitutional. Thomas Nagel contends that The Supreme Court should allow teaching the doctrine of Intelligent Design together with Darwinian evolution, since teaching evolution violates the Establishment Clause when taught as a rejection of divine creation, and Intelligent Design is an alternative hypothesis regarding the origins of life that does not endorse a particular religion. Do you agree with Nagel, or do you think the decision in Aguillard on Creationism should be extended to prohibit teaching Intelligent Design? I will give further instructions once a bid is selected! Thank you!