>>Danny Denier post #353 on the "Dover" case: "Hogwash. It demonstrates the power of a few leftist agitators, the ACLU, and a corrupt federal judge, along with the ability to sway public opinion using the deep pockets of the Left. Moreso, it is symbol of the moral decline of our nation since the ACLU came to power. How does it feel to be an ACLU apologist? Never mind. I don’t want to know."
>>Deceitful Joey wrote, "The case was brought by about a dozen parents of students, supported by the ACLU and others."
A dozen parents were able to sue the school board for carrying out their constitutionally authorized duties, and you pretend the ACLU and the parents are the good guys? I wouldn't want to be in a fox hole with you.
Your pretense that something good came from the ACLU's support is troubling, Joey. The ACLU has deep pockets with which to run campaigns against the Constitution and sway public opinion; and they can always find a few leftists in a crowd to represent, and a moldable activist judge.
**********************
>>Deceitful Joey wrote, "Defendants were represented by the Thomas More Law Center. The judge is a Republican Bush appointee who I disagree with on some other rulings but in this case find no fault."
When you attempt to confound a Bush appointee with conservatism, you are following the fake news narrative, not the history of judicial appointees. GHWB gave us David Souter and Ford gave us John Paul Stephens, both devout Socialists. Reagan gave us left-leaning Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy. And GWB gave us left-leaning John Roberts. Is it any wonder the leftists have been able to corrupt our government and society so thoroughly?
Back to Jones: he is a crystal-clear example of a judicial activist. The minute he took the case, making a federal case out of a state and local matter, he became an activist. A judge's role is to determine constitutionality, and in this case the strict constructionist thing to do would be to refuse to hear the case for jurisdictional reasons.
Jones not only took the case, but played the role of philosopher of science in his ruling. It is not the role of a judge to determine what is and is not science, but he assumed the role. Worse, he didn't rule on ID Theory at all; rather he ruled according to the ACLU caricature of ID Theory.
Part of the reason Jones ruled the way he did was his interpretation that ID failed to gain acceptance in the scientific community, which is ridiculously false. Some of the top scientists in the world promote Intelligent Design over Evolution – several of them were in his courtroom. Jones also made the false claim that there were no peer-reviewed ID papers.
You find "no fault," Joey, because you are not interested in the truth.
**********************
>>Deceitful Joey wrote, "The judge did find fault: "The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy. . . "
I have not studied the complete transcript, so I don't know for certain if anyone on the board lied; but there is no doubt Ken Miller lied with his perversion of the concept of irreducible complexity. Jones accepted Miller's fake version over the objections of two of the leading authorities on bacterial flagellum, Behe and Scott Minnich, who have been studying the flagellum for decades.
The theory of Intelligent Design has supporters, and at least one Senior Fellow, who have no religious convictions; and the theory does not pretend to claim who or what designed living things, only that the scientific evidence points to design. During the trial, the I.D. defenders repeatedly made that point, but the activist judge ignored them.
In all of that, the main point was never address, which is, it is NOT unconstitutional to teach religion in public schools. That is an invention of the God-hating, anti-Christian, anti-liberty ACLU.
**********************
>>Deceitful Joey wrote, "With that said, we do not question that many of the leading advocates of ID have bona fide and deeply held beliefs which drive their scholarly endeavors."
Are you referring to deeply-held Christian beliefs of Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday and James Clerk Maxwell? No doubt they let their religious beliefs "drive their scholarly endeavors," with great success. Some modern ID'ers do, for certain. Behe and Meyer are Christians, but old-earthers. But David Berlinsky is a Jewish agnostic who simply despises evolution and scientism.
What does that have to do with science? Are you pretending atheists make better scientists? I worry about you, Joey.
**********************
>>Deceitful Joey wrote, "Nor do we controvert that ID should continue to be studied, debated, and discussed. As stated, our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom."
You are a false teacher when you claim it is unconsitutional to teach religion in public schools. It is, however, blatantly unconstutitional for the federal government to establish the suppressive religion of evolutionism as the State supported religion.
It appears you support the establishment part of the First Amendment, Joey, and deny the free-exercise part. That is exactly what the ACLU and Marxists want you to support, because that is their best avenue to the destruction of our liberty and nation.
**********************
>>Deceitful Joey wrote, "I have the "Pandas & People" book, by itself it's fake but harmless."
That is nothing fake about it, Joey. It is both brilliant and scientifically sound. But how would you know one way or another? You are not a scientist. You only hear what you want to hear, and you only hear the words of the Left.
But, if you will be so kind, please show us parts where you believe the book is fake. Don't hold back. Your research will be of use to all. Please include Chapter and/or page numbers.
**********************
>>Deceitful Joey wrote, "What made it a legal matter was the government school board's order to force it on unwilling teachers, students' parents and voters."
That was never a problem until the ACLU showed up. School boards always made such decisions, before the dangerous rhetoric of the Left prevailed in our society -- rhetoric which you endorse.
In any case, the Dover School Board policy was apparently not clearly written; but the original purpose was to inform the students that there were holes in the theory of evolution, and there were alternative theories, both of which are absolutely true.
Contrary to the judge's opinion, the Discovery Institute policy did not support the Dover School Board science policy. The DI policy, which was established several years before the Board's action, sought to encourage individual teachers to introduce ID into the curriculum. It opposed mandatory enforcement by states or school boards.
**********************
>>Deceitful Joey wrote, "During the course of that the book was exposed as attempting to hide God's glory behind the ludicrous term, "intelligent design", pretending it could refer to anyone other than God. Indeed the book's authors themselves confessed "intelligent design" was just their idea of God's creation masquerading as science.
You claim to have the book, but you didn't show quotes to back you your claims. Besides, what is wrong with believing an all-powerful God intelligently designed things as mind-boggling complex as cells? Dumb Luck most certainly didn't create it. Only a fool would believe that. It is obvious to me, and anyone else paying attention, that evolutionists are trying to hide their hatred of God behind the veneer of science.
Why are you so quick to support judicial rulings contrary to our Christian heritage? Are you aware that the Supreme Court ruled this to be a Christian nation?
"These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation. In the face of all these, shall it be believed that a Congress of the United States intended to make it a misdemeanor for a church of this country to contract for the services of a Christian minister residing in another nation?" [Justice Brewer, the Opinion of the Court, in Authors Various, "Supreme Court 18920229: Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States." Justia, 143 U.S. 457, 1892]
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/143/457/
Where is stare decisis when you need it.
**********************
>>Deceitful Joey wrote, "As for who, exactly, "swayed public opinion", I've seen no evidence that "Dover" voters ever wanted "Intelligent Design" imposed on their students."
That is what school boards are elected to do, not the ACLU, and not disgruntled, left-wing "science" teachers, or a handful of parents. The school board voted 6-3 in favor of introducing ID. That should have been it, until the next election. But busybodies at the ACLU can't resist meddling in the affairs of others: no communist can. It is in their blood.
**********************
>>Danny Denier: "That was Joey, the moral relativist and ACLU apologist, at your service."
>>Deceitful Joey wrote, "Nonsense, science is not a "moral relativist", it simply observes natural facts and looks for natural explanations to fit them."
I didn't claim science was moral relativistic, Joey. When are you going to show us a few observed facts that support common descent, Joey? You know you cannot, because all the observed facts support special creation.
Child.
Mr. Kalamata
