Skip to comments.
1 Million Settlement Dover Lawsuit(Most to ACLU, Americans United,not lawyers)
York Daily Record ^
| 2/22/06
| Lauri Lebo and Michelle Starr
Posted on 02/22/2006 6:52:51 AM PST by Nextrush
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 181-190 next last
To: dmz
Look, the question, when put to the voters, was resolved. The board members with "impure thoughts" were booted out of office.
There simply was no need for the ACLU to get involved. Best they be kept from the courts anyway. They have their own "religious agenda" anyway.
81
posted on
02/22/2006 11:15:22 AM PST
by
muawiyah
(-)
To: muawiyah
I've seen the "holographic universe" term used elsewhere to mean something quite different. I think they're the same thing. One possible aspect of holographic principle (remember, not a theory, but a conjecture, a mental exercise) is the basis for the new age "Holographic Universe" idea, yet another "theory of everything" that doesn't usually go over too well in science.
To: muawiyah
Exactly my point. The ACLU would not have gotten involved had the school board not attempted stealth creationism. I think you have your timeline reversed. Look no further than the school board for fault on this one.
83
posted on
02/22/2006 11:21:26 AM PST
by
dmz
To: muawiyah
There simply was no need for the ACLU to get involved.
They were asked to be involved by the Dover residents who initiated the suit.
84
posted on
02/22/2006 11:22:17 AM PST
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: dmz
"stealth creationism" is what?
They don't teach that in my church ~ is it taught in yours?
I think the big problem is the ACLU has a whole lot of folks who fear somebody somewhere might at some time or the other say "In Jesus Name".
They really don't care about science, if you get my drift!
85
posted on
02/22/2006 11:25:35 AM PST
by
muawiyah
(-)
To: Dimensio
Dover residents who do not believe in democratic forms of government and process asked for ACLU involvement.
Has anybody checked their immigration status?
86
posted on
02/22/2006 11:26:25 AM PST
by
muawiyah
(-)
To: Chiapet; muawiyah
...just to explain whether those religious beliefs were the motivation for the ID policy they adopted.
...and, the court's authority to do so rests on the fact that the defendants put their religious motivations at issue.The judge didn't have any legal authority to question the motivations of any of the parties, much less base his decision on such considerations, because one's motivation is irrelevant to the issue of the showing of a secular PURPOSE. It's a case of an ideologue judge who apparently could not distinguish between motivation and purpose.
Cordially,
87
posted on
02/22/2006 11:28:41 AM PST
by
Diamond
To: muawiyah
I have no problem with vouchers. I made sure my kids got to the schools I wanted. I drove them across town myself.
88
posted on
02/22/2006 11:37:13 AM PST
by
js1138
(Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
To: Dimensio
So that's why we need the Second Amendment more than ever.
89
posted on
02/22/2006 11:40:05 AM PST
by
muawiyah
(-)
To: muawiyah
The judge really isn't authorized to determine if anything is truly religious in nature. That was pretty much his job as agreed to by the school board.
To: muawiyah
The US government and its subdivisions simply does not have the authority to punish you for failing to claim a religious affiliation. Of course not in a general sense, but if your religious beliefs have something to do with the case at hand you'd better talk.
To: antiRepublicrat
It's simply not up to the school board to determine the constitutional obligations and limitations of the judge.
92
posted on
02/22/2006 11:53:43 AM PST
by
muawiyah
(-)
To: antiRepublicrat
No, when it comes to religious beliefs, the government does not have the authority to pry, or to punish.
We have secular courts with secular rules. Doesn't matter if the plaintiffs agree to make the judge Pope!~ He's taken an oath and must stick to it.
93
posted on
02/22/2006 11:54:54 AM PST
by
muawiyah
(-)
To: muawiyah
But who the heck let the ACLU in? Where did those guys come from? Best we ship them back until we can think of a satisfactory place for them. Ummm, I think they're homegrown.
94
posted on
02/22/2006 11:56:01 AM PST
by
Erasmus
(One fine day, sad to say, we'll all be Democrat voters.)
To: Erasmus
95
posted on
02/22/2006 12:03:28 PM PST
by
muawiyah
(-)
To: antiRepublicrat
One possible aspect of holographic principle (remember, not a theory, but a conjecture, a mental exercise) is the basis for the new age "Holographic Universe" idea, yet another "theory of everything" that doesn't usually go over too well in science. I read part (about a third) of The Holographic Universe on recommendation of a friend who was convinced that it was a good idea. He was quite annoyed at my "close-mindedness" when I told him I thought it was basically New Age pseudoscientific BS. I remember the author (Michael Talbot) making bizarre claims about how humans can use mind control on computers and how he witnessed objects spontaneously floating in midair. Really ridiculous stuff (though there's no significant push to teach this garbage in public school science classes...)
96
posted on
02/22/2006 12:07:28 PM PST
by
Quark2005
(Is Gould dead?)
To: muawiyah
The judge really isn't authorized to determine if anything is truly religious in nature. He should keep that sort of thing to himself and off the bench.Not only that, but he had the hubris to decide demarcation criteria for science that philosophers of science have been unable to agree upon. Do those who favor this ACLU victory really want courts determining what is or is "not a scientific theory"?
Cordially,
97
posted on
02/22/2006 12:14:45 PM PST
by
Diamond
To: Steve_Seattle
I submit that even a so-called conservative judge can be wrong. I submit that so-called conservative former members of the Dover School Board who lied under oath "can be wrong."
98
posted on
02/22/2006 12:26:45 PM PST
by
longshadow
(FReeper #405, entering his ninth year of ignoring nitwits, nutcases, and recycled newbies)
To: muawiyah
Dover residents who do not believe in democratic forms of government and process asked for ACLU involvement.But that's the problem: We're not a democracy. We're a constitutional republic. In a constitutional republic, the democratically-elected representatives are constrained by the constitution, as applied by the courts. Darn Constitution! Darn judges! Darn law of gravity! Darn law of supply and demand! Darn arthritis... :-)
99
posted on
02/22/2006 12:35:50 PM PST
by
jennyp
(WHAT I'M READING NOW: The Chicago Manual of Style, 14th ed.)
To: longshadow
But they did for a
good cause.
100
posted on
02/22/2006 12:43:01 PM PST
by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 181-190 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson