Lies, Damned Lies, and Creationism 2
Judge Jones, of the Dover, Pa., creationism case, has been speaking out on the role of the legal system under the rule of law. From the local rag:
But he was surprised by how ignorant some of his critics were, in his view, about the Constitution and the separation of powers among the three branches of government.
Jones said he had no agenda regarding intelligent design but, rather, was taking advantage of the worldwide interest in the case to talk about constitutional issues important to him.
“I’ve found a message that resonates,” he said. “It’s a bit of a civics lesson, but it’s a point that needs to be made: that judges don’t act according to bias or political agenda.”
One particularly strident commentary piece by conservative columnist Phyllis Schlafly, published a week after the ruling, really set Jones off.
Schlafly wrote that Jones, a career Republican appointed to the federal bench by President Bush in 2002, wouldn’t be a judge if not for the “millions of evangelical Christians” who supported Bush in 2000. His ruling, she wrote, “stuck the knife in the backs of those who brought him to the dance in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District.”
“The implication was that I should throw one for the home team,” Jones said. “There were people who said during trial they could not accept, and did not anticipate, that a Republican judge appointed by a Republican president could do anything other than rule in the favor of the defendants.”
And Case Western Reserver University Professor Patricia J. Princehouse speaks on science:
June 11, 2006 at 7:34 pm
I wonder how far he had to travel to find someone who would buy his line about judges not ruling according to bias or political agenda.
June 13, 2006 at 4:24 pm
Interesting thoughts. There’s a great article that really simplifies all this at http://practically-thinking.blogspot.com/2006/05/of-science-and-creation.html. This should be a “must read”!