Replies

However, I sure know a lot of Christians who believe that the TOE is correct. I know they're not atheists.

If the defense attorneys in this case were smart, they would use this to their advantage.

If there are Christians who believe in the ToE, the defense could reasonably argue that ID is not creation in disguise.

Especially with Behe as a witness, the defense could say there are Christians and non-Christians on both sides of the argument. That being the case, the statement of the Dover school board is religiously neutral; isn't it?

It appears that the defense strategy is to pretend creation and ID have nothing in common. This is really stupid, since it insults the intelligence of any reasonable person. The defense should be that the statement is simply neutral on religion.

Hopefully, that will be the gist of the defense when it is their turn to present their case.

"If there are Christians who believe in the ToE, the defense could reasonably argue that ID is not creation in disguise.

Especially with Behe as a witness, the defense could say there are Christians and non-Christians on both sides of the argument. That being the case, the statement of the Dover school board is religiously neutral; isn't it?"

That's not going to happen, though. The defense has lost its case automatically, because:

1. The book in question was redacted to globally change "creationism" to "intelligent design."

2. The so-called "wedge" document is damning for their case.

3. The idiots on the board made stupid public comments that made it clear that introducing religion into the mix was part of their goal.

This case was lost before it began, and never should have been brought. The precedent set in this case will make it almost impossible to bring further ID cases successfully.

The problem is a lack of intelligent design of the legal case and a lack of intelligence, generally, on those who attempted this stupid end run around the SCOTUS ruling that made creationism non-teachable.

Now, I'm just talking about the defense's case here. You already know my opinion on creationism and ID.