You do understand that remedies are whatever is legally available in our system. Our government is not perfect, but courts are part of it, just as school board are part of school systems.
There is no point whatsoever in a bunck of perjuring dimwits injecting their ignorance into the science curriculum. Perhaps there is no good argument for federal judges interfering, but it happened.
I have been a FReeper for over six years, and the only thing I can say with some assurance is that FReepers will applaud a court decision they approve of and whine about judicial activism when they disagree with a decision.
No, I don't understand the perversion of the English language at all, no matter which side does it. Remedies, while legally available in our system, does not preclude use of the word in other systems.
Our government is not perfect, but courts are part of it, just as school board are part of school systems.
Yeah, so?
There is no point whatsoever in a bunck of perjuring dimwits injecting their ignorance into the science curriculum. Perhaps there is no good argument for federal judges interfering, but it happened.
Which is a problem in our country. Article 3 judges have taken it upon themselves to "guide" America toward a goal they percieve as worthy. That's not their job and all it does is poison the public discourse. It is a profound problem in America, much more so than a disclaimer in Dover, Pa which was turned out by the voters in Dover, Pa absent 'divine' intervention from the judicial oligarchy.
I have been a FReeper for over six years, and the only thing I can say with some assurance is that FReepers will applaud a court decision they approve of and whine about judicial activism when they disagree with a decision.
Which simply demonstrates a failing on your part. Painting with a wide brush always results in getting paint outside the lines.