![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Phyllis Schlafly has had her say about the Dover Decision now. Just like the last time I did this the madly-spinning propaganda will be bolded, while the rebuttal from the actual text of the decision is italic. My commentary will be plain text.
Judge John E. Jones III could still be chairman of the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board if millions of evangelical Christians had not pulled the lever for George W. Bush in 2000. Yet this federal judge, who owes his position entirely to those voters and the president who appointed him, stuck the knife in the backs of those who brought him to the dance in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District.
( Because justice is a fluid thing that should be bought by majority vote, and have dickall to do with the law, don'tchaknow. )
In an era of judicial supremacy, Judge Jones' biased and religiously bigoted decision is way over the top. His decision will ultimately hurt the evolutionist cause because it shows that the evolutionists cannot defend their beliefs on the merits; they can only survive by censoring alternate views.
The irony here is that Jones himself said that ID should be continue to be studied, debated, and discussed [137], which hardly serves as proof of censorship. He just pointed out, through 139 clearly written pages about the merits that forcing it upon students of a public school is both bad science and a violation of the clearly defined limits of the Establishment Clause.
But I guess that it's a "silly boast" to read 139 pages of judicial material...
Judge John E. Jones III could still be chairman of the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board if millions of evangelical Christians had not pulled the lever for George W. Bush in 2000. Yet this federal judge, who owes his position entirely to those voters and the president who appointed him, stuck the knife in the backs of those who brought him to the dance in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District.
( Because justice is a fluid thing that should be bought by majority vote, and have dickall to do with the law, don'tchaknow. )
In an era of judicial supremacy, Judge Jones' biased and religiously bigoted decision is way over the top. His decision will ultimately hurt the evolutionist cause because it shows that the evolutionists cannot defend their beliefs on the merits; they can only survive by censoring alternate views.
The irony here is that Jones himself said that ID should be continue to be studied, debated, and discussed [137], which hardly serves as proof of censorship. He just pointed out, through 139 clearly written pages about the merits that forcing it upon students of a public school is both bad science and a violation of the clearly defined limits of the Establishment Clause.
But I guess that it's a "silly boast" to read 139 pages of judicial material...
