Shill for the Discovery [sic] Institute Debates Distinguished Legal Scholar

Here.  My colleague, Professor Laycock, is perhaps the nation's preeminent academic authority on the law of religious liberty, who is unusual in having represented almost all sides in religious liberty cases (he was the primary drafter of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, for example, but also represented a group of clergy contending that "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is, indeed, unconstitutional).  It is obviously a nice public relations coup for the Discovery [sic] Institute when a member of its stable of shills for Intelligent Design Creationism gets to share a forum with someone of this level of scholarly and professional distinction.  Their representative on this occasion is none other than Francis Beckwith, whose intellectual and philosophical dishonesty we have encountered before (here and here, for example).  Many of his standard ploys and lies are already on display, and I may comment on them at greater length next week.  The basic issue, though, about the constitutionality of teaching Intelligent Design Creationism is pretty simple:  since there is no secular purpose in teaching it (since there are no scientific arguments in support of it), it is obviously barred by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.