Posted on 10/27/2005 1:41:22 PM PDT by Right Wing Professor
HARRISBURG, Pa. - A former school board member who denied advocating that creationism be taught alongside evolution in high-school biology classes changed his story Thursday after lawyers in a federal courtroom played a TV news clip that recorded him making such a comment.
William Buckingham explained the discrepancy by saying that he "misspoke."
Buckingham's testimony came in the fifth week of testimony in a lawsuit filed by eight families who are challenging the Dover Area School District's policy that students hear a statement about intelligent design in biology classes. Critics say intelligent design is a repackaging of the biblical view of creation and thus violates the constitutional separation of church and state.
Buckingham, who led the board's curriculum committee when it approved the policy a year ago, confirmed Thursday that he said during a June 2004 board meeting that the biology textbook is "laced with Darwinism." The clip that was shown later in the day came from an interview that he gave to a news crew from WPMT-TV in York later in the month.
"It's OK to teach Darwin," he said in the interview, "but you have to balance it with something else, such as creationism."
Asked to explain by a lawyer for the plaintiffs, Buckingham said he felt "ambushed" by the camera crew as he walked across a parking lot to his car and that he had been consciously trying to avoid mentioning creationism.
"I had it in my mind to make sure not to talk about creationism. I had it on my mind. I was like a deer in the headlights. I misspoke," he told U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III, who is presiding over the non-jury trial.
Earlier in Thursday's court session, Buckingham claimed that he had been misquoted in stories from two newspapers that reported his advocating the teaching of creationism to counterbalance the material on evolution.
"It's just another instance when we would say intelligent design and they would print creationism," he said.
When Stephen Harvey, the plaintiffs' lawyer, noted the similarity of the newspaper reports to what he told the TV crew, Buckingham replied, "That doesn't mean it's accurate."
Buckingham moved to North Carolina in July and resigned from the board, citing health problems.
The statement that the Dover teachers are required to read before ninth-grade biology lessons on evolution says Darwin's theory is not a fact and has inexplicable gaps. It refers students to a textbook, "Of Pandas and People," for more information.
Intelligent design supporters argue that natural selection, an element of evolutionary theory, cannot fully explain the origin of life or the emergence of highly complex life forms.
The trial began Sept. 26 and could last through early November.
The plaintiffs are represented by a team put together by the American Civil Liberties Union and Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The school district is being represented by the Thomas More Law Center, a public-interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Mich., that says its mission is to defend the religious freedom of Christians.
The Grand Master prizes truth above all else, but the use of the term "liar" has been troublesome. Although often accurate, it upsets the mods. Therefore, the Grand Master prefers euphemisms. "Misspeak" is fine. "Repetitive misstatement" is good too.
On behalf of the Grand Master, I am
etc. etc.
played a TV news clip that recorded him making such a comment.
He would be a great politician.
Clinton's an excellent 'misspeaker'.
He's not in Congress though. :)
'misspoke'...whenever anyone, and I mean anyone, says they 'misspoke'
I did that on a tire once.
Narrow minds are prone to react like that.
Hey! Quit making fun of us coneheads!!
"It's OK to teach Darwin," he said in the interview, "but you have to balance it with something else, such as creationism."[emphasis added, to illustrate just how laughable someAsked to explain by a lawyer for the plaintiffs, Buckingham said he felt "ambushed" by the camera crew as he walked across a parking lot to his car and that he had been consciously trying to avoid mentioning creationism.
"I had it in my mind to make sure not to talk about creationism. I had it on my mind. I was like a deer in the headlights. I misspoke," he told U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III,.....
This sounds like a scene out COPS, the TV reality police show, where the perp arrested for soliciting a sex act from an undercover cop tries to tell the officer: "But, Sir; I was really just going to ask her if she knew what time it was. I had it in my mind to make sure not to ask about 'bl@w jobs'. I had it on my mind. I was like a deer in the headlights. I misspoke,"
Too funny.
No rebuttal witness necessary for this guy's testimony: "res ipsa loquitur." Similarly, no amount of "rehabilitation" of this witness will restore his believability. Stick a fork in him, he's done!
I am so glad that you are up front and honest in your justification for supporting the monstrosity of the Government School. (This will be a good quote by you to save for later)
You are plainly saying that you want the Government Schools monopoly to exist, regardless of how bad they are, because they back your ideas in one area and they help prevent most parents from choosing what their own children will be taught.
It is good that you are being honest, most people with your mindset still like to pretend it is not about parental choice, it is merely a church/state issue. Of course most of us know what it has always been about, it has always been about a desire by some to use the Government to indoctrinate a captive audience of children into the 'proper' points of view.
Eliminate the Government Schools and all these arguments about what 'shall be taught' , 'thus saith big brother' will come to an end.
"Misspeak" is fine. "Repetitive misstatement" is good too.
Darwin Central Correctness?.
Who's 'Peak', and why does everyone miss him so much?
"Manifold mendacities"
(not to be confused with being Mathematically deceptive with regard to a Vector Space)
Another creationist liar. Nothing new here. Time to move on.
hmmm. This seems to help the plantiffs' case.
But, it begs the question, why would they call as their star witness a man that says that ID is man evolving over millions of years from simple organisms and that we should teach children that God may be dead since we haven't seen any evidence of God lately.
"Bearing false witness" works ok.
Ooooo; very good, indeed! (shouldn't it be: "pantaloons combusting"?)
Better still:
"Pantaloon conflagrante!"
Oxidizing. When jargonizing, prefer the vague to the specific.
YES! It will sound to the creationists like being caught in a compromising position. They ABHOR compromise.
And if they are caught red-handed in so compromising a situation that they'll burn in Hell for it for all eternity, it would be: "in conflagrante delicto".....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.