Judge THIS, Jones!
Things that really make me say WTF.
PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - A judge on Tuesday barred the teaching of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution at a Pennsylvania school, saying in a scathing rebuke to the school board that it violated a constitutional ban on teaching religion in public schools.
"Our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in a public school classroom," Jones wrote in a 139-page opinion in the case, brought against the Dover School District.
Jones condemned the "breathtaking inanity" of the policy of the board, all but one of whom have now been ousted by local voters.
"Any asserted secular purposes by the board are a sham and are merely secondary to a religious objective," he said.
blah, blah, blah, blah.....
In October 2004, Dover became the first U.S. school district to include intelligent design in science curriculum.
Ninth-grade biology students were presented with a four-paragraph statement saying that evolution is a theory, not a fact, and that there are "gaps" in the theory. The statement invited students to consider other explanations of the origins of life, including intelligent design.
My Questions:
Where exactly in the constitution does it ban teaching religion in a public school? How is it unconstitutional to teach or "invite students to consider other explanations"?
Isn't that what school is for, to teach kids to think and draw conclusions?
Where is it shown that Darwin's evolution is undisputed FACT, not just a theory itself?
Who really wins with this ruling?
Is this ruling really done in the best interest of the kids or are they just pawns in someone's political agenda?
Does a judge in this position really have the power to condemn?
WTF is happening to our country?
I remember asking myself how religion fits into this guy Darwin's theory that we all evolved from monkeys, the first time I heard it in school. I struggled with understanding how Adam and Eve fit into that. Were they swinging from the branches of an apple tree?
I reached my own conclusions. Can't they?
3 Comments:
Try the separation of church and state.
By
Anonymous, at
5:11 PM
"Try the separation of church and state."
Uh, I don't think that "Congress shall pass no law establishing a religion" (if that's what you're referring to) has anything to do with teaching our children that it just might be possible that someone out there is smarter than we are. Judge Jones is a moron.
By
NewMan, at
5:50 PM
U.S. Constitution - Amendment 1
Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
I'm all for the government not establishing a religion or forcing me to follow any particular religion. But it also says, the government shall not "prohibit the free exercise thereof", or prohibit free speech, both of which seem to be being done by this judge who is undoubtedly pushing a particular and/or personal agenda/belief moreso than enforcing the constitution.
That part seems to be overlooked these days.
The even larger point of the article, though, was to lament taking away the option to explore other theories in schools. That doesn't have to mean the school (government) can make them believe one over the other. They are both simply theories, not proven facts that can not be questioned.
It seems to me that the people who are so threatened/afraid of religion are just as damaging to the learning process as those who so strongly wish to force a particular religion on children.
The great part of living in this country under our constitution is freedom to chose. Seems Judge Jones doesn't believe the same.
By
Bryan, at
6:44 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home