[RussP]

Well stated. I urge everyone to read your post again.

Another thing you could have mentioned is that the Federal government routinely subsidized the construction of churches for something like the first 150 years of the republic.

The notion that even mentioning the possibility of ID in science class somehow constitutes the establishment of religion is preposterous. That such a notion is even taken seriously is cause for alarm.

Oh, and which document was it that mentioned something about a "Creator"?

Also, I really love the implication that this judge must be right because he anticipated the charge of judicial activism! Gosh, I can anticipate all the bogus arguments of the evolutionists, so I must be right too.

[Cicero]

Thanks for the good word. These threads can get depressing. The Darwinists never stop pasting in their boilerplate until they've beaten all signs of anyone wanting to argue with them into the ground. When the dust clears, everyone else has abandoned the thread.

It has the opposite effect on me, and I suspect on many others who trouble to read these threads. Such fanaticism, such desperate repetition of the same mantras, only reveals how stubbornly closed-minded they are.

[Coyoteman]

The notion that even mentioning the possibility of ID in science class somehow constitutes the establishment of religion is preposterous. That such a notion is even taken seriously is cause for alarm.

ID is not science, it is religion lite. To be more specific, it is the application of the wedge strategy which was designed to try to sneak creationism into schools after creation "science" was blown out of the water by the Supreme Court in 1987.

Now that ID has been blown out of the water in Dover, will there be some other strategy devised to achieve the same ends? (I can hardly wait.)

[Ichneumon]

Another thing you could have mentioned is that the Federal government routinely subsidized the construction of churches for something like the first 150 years of the republic.

Citation?

The notion that even mentioning the possibility of ID in science class somehow constitutes the establishment of religion is preposterous.

That's why no one has actually made such a claim. Please do not misrepresent the Dover decision.

That such a notion is even taken seriously is cause for alarm.

What's actually cause for alarm is your misrepresentation of the actual situation.

Also, I really love the implication that this judge must be right because he anticipated the charge of judicial activism!

No one has said *that* either. You're pretty fond of Straw Man arguments, aren't you?

Gosh, I can anticipate all the bogus arguments of the evolutionists, so I must be right too.

Unlikely.