[Abd al-Rahiim]

I cannot help but conclude that Judge Jones' repeated mistatements [sic] of fact and his one-sided recitation of the "evidence" reveal not only a judicial activist, but an incredibly sloppy judge who selects the facts to fit the result he wants.

Do you think our President would nominate a judicial activist?

Do you think a judicial activist would have been unanimously confirmed by a GOP-dominated Senate?

Judge Jones adhered to precedent and took into account the testimonies of expert defense witnesses in his ruling, including their confessions that intelligent design is at best a "fringe science."

[SirLinksalot]

Judge Jones adhered to precedent and took into account the testimonies of expert defense witnesses in his ruling, including their confessions that intelligent design is at best a "fringe science."

Here's my personal take on this issue --- LEAVE IT TO THE VOTERS OF DOVER WHO PAY THEIR PROPERTY TAXES TO DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES WHAT THEY WANT THEIR KIDS TO BE EXPOSED TO.

I am very uncomfortable with a judge who takes it upon himself to decide what is and isn't "fringe science" (and BTW, we have expert testimonies on BOTH SIDES so please spare me that carp about "expert witness" ).

A true conservative judge worth his salt would simply throw the case out and say -- THIS COURT AND THIS SINGLE JUDGE DOES NOT MAKE THE DECISION FOR YOU... YOU ARE FREE CITIZENS, ABLE TO DECIDE AMONG YOURSELVES WHAT AND WHAT NOT TO INCLUDE IN YOUR CURRICULUM." The judge would then leave it to the Dover voters to decide if they want to keep the wording as is or throw it away ( ID was NOT being taught in the district BTW, what was at issue was one of the recommended reading list which was NOT EVEN COMPULSORY ).

If the Dover voters want it, they vote for it accordingly, if they don't, they vote against it. That's how Constitutional Republicanism should work in this country as I see it.