Law Professor Crosses Evolution Battle Lines: Conservative leader sides with ACLU

The Fulton County Daily Report (via Law.com) ^ | 12-15-2005 | Greg Land

[rootkidslim]

What he is saying...
But for a similar typo on registration, I would be rootkitslim!

[rootkidslim]

The truth is an absolute defense against slander charges, ask any lawyer, or Howie Carr.

[Servant of the 9]

The ACLU. Like the rest of the communists trying to tear apart America.

Yeah, all those commies like Bob Barr and sometimes Newt Gingrich.

So9

[PatrickHenry]

Any bets on how long before THIS professor, a card carrying conservative if there ever were one, gets his face beaten by a couple of "good ol' boys" drivin' a pickup truck, for speaking out against inserting religiously-motivated unscientific claptrap into public school science books and characterizing creationists as "lunatics"?

This professor is typical of the science-literate conservatives who routinely defend evolution (and all of science) on our threads. It's perfectly possible -- and quite rational -- to be a conservative and to have an appreciation of science. I've got a little essay on that subject at the start of my homepage. Excerpt:

Science appeals to the conservative mind for the same reasons that free enterprise does. It's reality-based, it focuses on what works, it rejects failed concepts, and it produces results.

The aberrational mindset is to be anti-science. Nothing "conservative" about that.

[PreciousLiberty]

"Why is his last comment neccessary?"

Perhaps he's seen some of the evolution threads on FR?

[shuckmaster]

"And I'm not religiously sympathetic to anti-evolutionists, who I think are lunatics."

You've got my conservative vote sir!

[wallcrawlr]

From the article:

'ATTACKS ON CHRISTIAN EXPRESSION'

Hogue's former group, the Southeastern Legal Foundation, has not taken a public position on the case.

Executive Director Shannon L. Goessling, who succeeded Hogue in September 2004, spoke highly of her predecessor but is in favor of returning the stickers to the textbooks.

"It appears that, on a daily basis, we're bombarded with attacks on Christian expression," she said.

She said Hogue's brief "suggests that critical thinking and faith are somehow mutually exclusive."

"There are students at every Cobb County school who are taught, at home and at church, to believe in creationism," said Goessling. "That doesn't mean that they all fail science by definition."

Goessling said this is a case in which reasonable minds can disagree. "This is not a separation-of-church-and-state case," she said. "This is a case allowing competing theories to be taught. ... The sticker is a simple declaratory statement that does not favor or disfavor evolution as a scientific theory."

Goessling's analysis reflects many of the pro-sticker arguments in the case, including the one filed by Cobb County and an amicus brief on behalf of the states of Texas and Alabama, both of which have disclaimers in science textbooks.

Marietta attorney Ernest Linwood Gunn IV, representing Cobb County, wrote in his brief, "The Court's focus should be, first and foremost, on the neutral language of the Sticker itself, together with the extensive evolutionary curriculum to which it is attached.

"The issue is not whether the Sticker has educational merit, whether it is well-written, or whether one can imagine persons offended by its meaning. The issue is whether the Sticker endorses religion. Both on its face, and in its specific content, this Sticker does not," wrote Gunn, who did not return a call for comment.

Revelation 4:11Intelligent Design
See my profile for info

[shuckmaster]

Why is his last comment neccessary?

Because it's quite true and needs repeating until people start snapping out of their superstitious brainwash against science education.

[Dimensio]

"This is a case allowing competing theories to be taught..."

Creationist lie #344: Intelligent Design and/or creationism are "competing theories", on par with the scientific theory of evolution.

[trisham]

Goessling said this is a case in which reasonable minds can disagree. "This is not a separation-of-church-and-state case," she said. "This is a case allowing competing theories to be taught. ... The sticker is a simple declaratory statement that does not favor or disfavor evolution as a scientific theory."

**************

This is my position on the issue as well.

[shuckmaster]

One doesn't have to be a lunatic to be a supernaturalist.

The ones who want to cram their religious beliefs down peoples throats by forcing charlatan myths into science class certainly qualify!

[Zack Nguyen]

"And I'm not religiously sympathetic to anti-evolutionists, who I think are lunatics."

This sort of language is insulting and degrading.

[wallcrawlr]

You should read this:

The strange tales of Paul Mirecki
Townhall.com ^ | Dec 14, 2005 | by Michelle Malkin

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1540476/posts

[Dimensio]

What are the "competing theories"?

[shuckmaster]

What are the "competing theories"?

Fiction concocted by dishonest trolls?

[wallcrawlr]

shucker....youre passion is admirable yet you do not know how to temper yourself.

sad, very sad...

[PatrickHenry]

What are the "competing theories"?

Creationism, a purely religious concept, which has quite properly been declared unconsititonal in the science classes of public schools (Edwards v. Aguillard), has been shamelessly renamed "Intelligent Design," and this has been fully exposed in the Dover trial. See Supplement to Expert Witness Report by Barbara Forrest: Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District

[DannyTN]

"Yes, Virginia, there are conservative evolutionists."

Yes, but finding one is like getting to visit the north pole. It doesn't happen often.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[puroresu]

#####Why is his last comment neccessary?#####


It wasn't, but just in case the media didn't fawn sufficiently over him for siding with the ACLU, he added the insulting final comment to guarantee it.