Replies

>>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

Kalamata post #458: "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."

So, you are a veteran who served in wartime?

The fact is, both sides were supported by outside parties eager to make a test case of it.
The school board was represented by Thomas More Law Center (TMLC).
Defense witnesses included university professors Michael Behe and Steve Fuller.

In the end Dover voters fired the school board and the judge ruled against their "Intelligent Design" teaching.
Intelligent Design was found to be just Creationism repackaged and so not permissible for mandatory science classes.

I have no problem with "intelligent design" taught as theology in any voluntary context.
But by US law it's not science and cannot be taught as such in mandatory science classes.

Kalamata: "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."

Baby-Danny, roughly one-third of Americans believe Creationism and so the anti-evolution movement is potentially huge, dwarfing anything the ACLU might do.
In Kitzmiller v Dover anti-evolutionists mounted a vigorous defense but were defeated by their own internal contradictions, especially in simultaneously claiming and denying that Intelligent Design had anything to do with God.

Judge Jones' ruling was simply consistent with many previous rulings going back at least to 1968 Epperson v. Arkansas.
See my post #468 for details.

Kalamata: "When you attempt to confound a Bush appointee with conservatism, you are following the fake news narrative, not the history of judicial appointees."

I'd say nearly all Bush family appointees were more conservative than those appointed by, for examples, Clinton & Obama.
That you might wish them to be more conservative is understandable, but when you consider what happened to Robert Bork (Reagan) and Clarence Thomas (HW Bush), those who did get confirmed were the best possible.
Scalia was a Reagan appointee and Alito Bush II.

Kalamata: "Is it any wonder the leftists have been able to corrupt our government and society so thoroughly?"

Reagan got Scalia, O'Connor & Kennedy but not Bork, .
Bush I got Thomas but also Souter.
Bush II got Alito but also Roberts who was then said to be quite conservative.
Trump has Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.

No court I know of has ruled in favor of Creationism in public schools.

Kalamata: "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."

Complete nonsense.
See my post #468 for a listing of ten similar rulings going back to 1968.
As I said there:

"Notice that two of these cases were decided by the US Supreme Court, two by state courts, four by Federal district and two by Federal appeals courts." At every level courts have consistently decided that religion cannot be taught in public school mandatory science classes.

Kalamata: "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."

More nonsense.
The issue was whether "Intelligent Design" was simply Creationism renamed and the judge ruled reasonably enough that it is.
As such it's theology, not science.

Kalamata: "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. "

Right, as I said above, both sides were defended by outside interests, the school board by charlatans & scoundrels like Professors Behe & Fuller.
Jones could easily see which side was telling the truth and ruled accordingly.
More important, Dover voters saw the truth and fired their old school board.

Kalamata: "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."

Of course there are no peer-reviewed papers in recognized scientific journals.
In fact, Jones heard out both sides and decided your side, Kalamata, was lying.
How did he know when you people are lying?
It's easy, is your mouth moving, are your fingers typing?
Then you're lying, it's who you are, it's what you do.

Kalamata: "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 true fact is the Dover school board wanted to introduce Creationism to science classes but was told that "Intelligent Design" was an acceptable substitute which would pass legal muster and still corrupt science with Creationist theology.
Judge Jones figured that out.

As for Behe's allegedly "irreducibly complex" flagellum, Miller & others have shown they are not in the least "irreducible", that they came from a much simpler provenance and evolved in many stages to their current complex form, whether Behe, Minnich or Kalamata like it or not.

Kalamata: "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."

Because it's all a lie, a big fat stinking lie from stinking liars.
Stop lying.

Kalamata: "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."

Near as I can tell, US Supreme Court rulings against teaching religion in public schools go back to 1948, McCollum v. Board of Education District 71, 1962, Engel v. Vitale and 1963, Abington School District v. Schempp.
Those rulings are consistent and hinge on the fact that public school attendance is mandatory.
Voluntary private schools and home schools can teach as much religion as they wish.

Kalamata: "Are you referring to deeply-held Christian beliefs of Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday and James Clerk Maxwell? "

No, I was quoting Judge Jones' ruling.

Kalamata: "What does that have to do with science?
Are you pretending atheists make better scientists? I worry about you, Joey."

No, Judge Jones was recognizing the sincere Christian beliefs of the Dover school board.
It helped him decide against "Intelligent Design".

Kalamata: "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."

Again you quoted Judge Jones and again your words here redefining & reversing "science" and "religion" should vindicate his ruling in the eyes on any traditionally reasonable person.

Kalamata: "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."

It appears you support lunacy from beginning to end.
If you can get away with redefining science as a "religion" and your own religion as "science" then we will have descended into blithering insanity where anything can mean anything the political powers that be dictate.

No thank you.

Kalamata on "Of Pandas and People": "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."

By your own definitions, where your religious beliefs are so-called "science" and real science is another "religion", you can claim to be anything and nobody can dispute it.

Kalamata: "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."

I said the book is "fake but harmless".
The harmless parts are all which review straight science.
The fake parts are all which talk about "intelligent design".

Kalamata: "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."

As best I can tell, the US Supreme Court began ruling against mandatory teaching religion in public schools in 1948, and has ruled consistently on it ever since.

Kalamata: "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."

Both of which are absolute lies promoted by charlatans & scoundrels.

Kalamata: "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."

Hmmmmm…. I wonder...

The Discovery Institute's John West

Opponents, represented by the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the National Association of Biology Teachers, contended that his statement is not just ironic, but hypocritical, as the Discovery Institute opposes methodological naturalism, the basic principle that limits science to natural phenomena and natural causes without assuming the existence or non-existence of the supernatural, which by definition is beyond natural explanation."

It appears that Creationists blew this case by not getting their acts together, so Discovery Institute ran for the hills and left Thomas More Law Center (TMLC) holding the bag.

Enough for post #458 for today, more later...

Kalamata: Kalamata post #458: "You claim to have the book, but you didn't show quotes to back you your claims."

I have the hard-copy c1989, 1993 Sixth printing 2003.

Kalamata: "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."

Most Christians would say that if God chose "dumb luck" to accomplish His purposes, so be it.
But then, how "dumb" can it be if it's all according to God's plans?

As for who really "hates God" more, who could hate God more than those who wish to confine Him to Creationists' "God of the Gaps" theology?

Kalamata: "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?"

Curiously enough, it turns out that modern conservative textualist Justice Antonin Scalia opposed the Court's Church v US 1892 decision precisely because it was, we would say, "activist" in trying to interpret the lawmakers' intent rather than the law's text.
Indeed, Scalia himself marked that SCOTUS decision as the point at which the Supreme Court first began to come off its rails.

Justice David Brewer, Republican from Kansas, wrote the Court's unanimous decision, and in 1905 explained his words in a book, "The United States: A Christian Nation".

"In fact, the government as a legal organization is independent of all religions.
Nevertheless, we constantly speak of this republic as a Christian Nation—in fact, as the leading Christian Nation of the world.
This popular use of the term certainly has significance.
It is not a mere creation of the imagination.
It is not a term of derision but has substantial basis—one which justifies its use.[4][5]"

We should further notice the case had nothing whatever to do with public schools, prayers or evolution, but involved laws prohibiting hiring contracts for immigrant laborers and should those apply to priests?
Justice Brewer said "no" even though the law's text made no such exemptions.

Justice Scalia pointed to that as the beginnings of judicial activism.

Kalamata: "Where is stare decisis when you need it."

Stare decisis is often overturned when SCOTUS feels more modern laws or consensus contradict it.

Kalamata: "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."

Again I refer you to my post #468 for a long list of court decisions going back to 1968, defending evolution in public school science classes.

Kalamata: "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."

All of that is just more of your slavish obedience to Denier Rules, in this case #1, #2, #5, #6, #7, #8 & #9.