Thanks to
muskrat_john for linking to the text of the judgment in the recent 'Intelligent Design' case in the US. It's a long read, but worth the effort in order to see how thoroughly Judge Jones dissected the 'ID' position to reveal it for the fundamentalist religious interloper into secular education that it really is. If there was a Richard Dawkins Award for kicking creationists where it hurts, Judge Jones - who, it is worth noting, is a Bush appointee - would be a shoo-in.
Without wishing to sound too snarky, I will note how several witnesses who would evidently describe themselves as born-again Christians were found by the judge to have lied repeatedly under oath in the course of their evidence. You know, the oath where you put your hand on the Bible and swear to God to tell the truth?
I have no problem with other people's religious beliefs, so long as they don't assume that they somehow apply to me (or any other innocent party). Stinking, blatant hypocrisy is another matter, though.
Without wishing to sound too snarky, I will note how several witnesses who would evidently describe themselves as born-again Christians were found by the judge to have lied repeatedly under oath in the course of their evidence. You know, the oath where you put your hand on the Bible and swear to God to tell the truth?
I have no problem with other people's religious beliefs, so long as they don't assume that they somehow apply to me (or any other innocent party). Stinking, blatant hypocrisy is another matter, though.
no subject
Date: 2005-12-22 07:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-22 09:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-22 10:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-22 11:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-23 02:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-23 11:27 am (UTC)And get defeated once again, because their arguments can't be made to hold water no matter how hard they try. But so what?