Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CottShop
How often do you suppose a judge includes the arguments of the lawyers of the prevailing side in his decision?

If the judge was convinced by the I.D. testimony and ruled that it was Science and included the arguments of the defense in his decision, would that make him not ‘cometent’ enough to think for himself?

Your argument has scant basis in fact, no basis in law, and is entirely partisan based upon the outcome you think the judge should have arrived at because it was the outcome you desired.

Your side lost, now it is all over but the crying.

So cry baby cry, make your momma sigh.

254 posted on 12/04/2007 3:24:59 PM PST by allmendream ("A Lyger is pretty much my favorite animal."NapoleonD (Hunter 08))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies ]


To: allmendream
If the judge was convinced by the I.D. testimony and ruled that it was Science and included the arguments of the defense in his decision, would that make him not ‘cometent’ enough to think for himself?

The "judge" is not qualified to rule on what is science and what isn't science. He is no more qualified to decide that ID isn't science than courts are qualified to hold that CO2 is a pollutant which is exactly what a majority of the SCOTUS held.

The "judge" overeached and because he overeached you hold him as an exemplar of judicial excellence when in fact he's an activist masquerading as a scientist.

Pretty funny actually.

255 posted on 12/04/2007 3:32:11 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson