[JeffAtlanta]

Article is excerpted...

Looks like we might be taking a step backward in Georgia.

[JeffAtlanta]

Ping worthy?

[CharlesWayneCT]

Looks like a victory for the truth. Another out-of-control judge meddling in the legislature looks like he's setting up for a smack-down.

[CharlesWayneCT]

That is, unless you believe that part of the constitutional duty of judges in our system of government is to protect someone's idea of science from "meddling" by the people's legislature.

Whether you think the legislature should have put stickers in the books or not, you should reject the notion that evolution is a constitutionally protected teaching.

[trebb]

Looks like we might be taking a step backward in Georgia.

Allowing a fact to be added is a step backwards? The stickers never endorsed religion, creationism, or ID, they just pointed out that evolution is a theory.

[RoadTest]

Evolution is, indeed, a theory, and not a fact.

[Condor51]

***Looks like we might be taking a step backward in Georgia.***

Not necessarily.

What I get out of this is that another godless Clinton stooge, 'judge' Clarence Cooper, got spanked good for making stuff up, i.e. not following the facts, all in order to impose his personal views on society.

[theBuckwheat]

backwards, or forwards?

Evolution is a theory. We have truth in advertising and fraud laws. The FDA will not allow vitamin or food supplement companies to make claims that are not substantiated, and so on. How can the theory of evolution be allowed to be stated as fact, when in fact it is just a theory?

Do the advocates of evolution try to have it both ways? Like light, which is manifest as a particle and a wave at the very same time, can evolution be both a theory and a fact simultaneously? I think not. Unlike light, it must either be theory or it is a fact; it cannot be both.

Supporters insist it is a fact. If you google "theory of evolution" you get 49 million hits. At what point of evidence was this theory established as a fact? I know of none. Laughingly, even the supporters themselves commonly refer to it as a theory.

So why all this fuss about just being honest about it in our dealings with young students? It is about denying that there just might be a Creator. The intensity with which evolutionary supporters deny that tells us far more about them then about their idea of fact or theory. Indeed, it seems they will move heaven and earth to avoid that possibility. Or maybe it would be better put that they are hell bent on it.

[inquest]

Congress could put a stop to all this idiocy by removing jurisdiction of the federal courts to review school science curricula. They have no business sticking their noses in any of this.

[jwalsh07]

No Jeff. We, Americans who believe in this constitutional republic, are taking a step forward.

This wasn't even close. No surprise here that this judge got smacked dwon hard.

[jwalsh07]

FYI.

[Timmy]

Looks like we might be taking a step backward in Georgia.

Are y'all such fascists that you think it's unconstitutional for a school board to put a sticker stating only that "Evolution is a theory, not a fact" in a high school textbook? Sheesh. I can understand the America-hating liberals taking such a stand, but aren't you guys supposed to be freedom-loving Americans? Just like the Michael Moore democrats, you guys demand total thought control. What a bunch of arrogant, self-righteous fascists.

[wallcrawlr]

Three federal appeals court judges today indicated a lower court judge got key facts wrong in declaring unconstitutional an evolution disclaimer sticker put in Cobb County science books.

During oral arguments, all members of the federal appeals court panel noted that U.S. District Court Judge Clarence Cooper made incorrect findings as the basis for his decision that the stickers violated the First Amendment by endorsing a religious viewpoint.

Revelation 4:11Intelligent Design
See my profile for info

[LiteKeeper]

YEC SPOTREP

[shuckmaster]

The Cobb school board's attorney, Linwood Gunn, asked the 11th Circuit to look at the stickers in the context of the time when they were adopted. The board was then in the process of strengthening its teaching of evolution. "If they wanted to restrict evolution instruction, they would have done nothing," Gunn said. "They would have maintained the status quo. ... All they did was improve evolution instruction."

I haven't heard this angle before. The things you miss when you rely upon mainstream media to get the news out...

[MEGoody]

There's nothing religious in declaring evolution "a theory, not a fact". Evols get so upset when someone questions their own religion that, rather than address the actual questions, they set up a strawman they can knock down. Apparently, they don't believe they can 'knock down' the questions with real answers.

[RobRoy]

"Looks like we might be taking a step backward in Georgia."

...or forward. Maybe we've been going backward long enough.

The stickers were pretty straightforward, the case was lame, and the judge was obviously biased. It looks like it is being brought before adults now.