Evolution on Trial by Bill Whitehouse

I find it very odd that the although the trial is supposed to be about the trial almost nothing is said about what is actually being taught. Yet that should surely be the central issue of the trial.What is even odder is that the material the trial does cover is not material I'd expect to be given prominent coverage in a school curriculum. It's material that would have been dealt with in summary, if at all.

Corrigan is supposedly the defendant. The charge - even though it's not clear what it really is - is that it was illegal to teach what he taught (although we are never given any reason for that either). So the prosecution should be attempting to show that he taught material which is forbidden by law. How can that be done without discussing that material ? It's clearly more relevant to the supposed trial than most of the material that IS discussed. It should be a key part of the prosecution even if the defence does not care to dispute it. But even the prosecution is uninterested in raising the matter.

For comparison here's a quote from the Scopes trial:From Day 4The Prosecution: The Prosecution was quite clear that the only question at issue was whether Scopes taught evolution. If he did that was against the law, and he should be found guilty and convicted.