Disapproval of religion in public schools

[Eugene Volokh]

    Rick's question strikes me as extremely interesting (and
important).  The Court's Establishment Clause rhetoric has of course
often stressed that the Clause bans not only favoritism towards
religion but also hostility to religion; not only actions whose
primary effect is to benefit religion but also actions whose primary
effect is to inhibit religion; not only endorsement of religion but
also disapproval of religion.  I take it that at least some of the
acceptance of Estab Cl doctrine has come of people relying on this
seeming evenhandedness.

    In light of this, here's my question:  How should a teacher
respond to the example Rick gave:  A science quiz asks "Where did the
earth come from?"  The student (following Rick's example, let's call
him Timmy) responds "God created it."

    One possible answer would be that the teacher should not mark
Timmy down on this quiz, nor tell Timmy "You're wrong," but on all
future quizzes ask "Relying only on the material we learned in class,
where did the earth come from?"  Then if Timmy says "God created it,"
the teacher can mark him down for not following the instructions in
the introductory clause:  Not "No, God didn't create the earth," but
"No, the material that we learned in class only talked about the Big
Bang theory."

    Would this framework be constitutionally adequate?
Constitutionally necessary?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
"She told me again she preferred handsome men       Eugene Volokh
 But for me she would make an exception"            UCLA Law School
 L. Cohen, "Chelsea Hotel No. 2"                    405 Hilgard Ave.
                                                    L.A., CA 90095