News-Record.com

I just saw this, but after reading all the reports from the trial itself, I don't find it surprising. I was able to download the actual court decision (all 139 pages of it!) from CNN. It'll take a while, but I'm going to read over it to see exactly what the reasoning was and what sort of limits to ID might have been created.

Now I can't wait to see if Pat Robertson will start praying for God to put in a hit for this judge...

I read excerpts, including ones in which the judge accused ID supporters of lying about their motives AND mocked their claims of piety in light of that lying. He also called their entire effort "inanity." That's gonna leave a mark.

I wonder if the judge will get beat up the way that Kansas professor was? Going on the wrong side of Intelligent Design supporters might become quite a dangerous choice...

From the reports that I have read regarding this decision, I find it very solid. While some comments by the Judge may be harsh, I feel that the context was on target!

Let "ID" be taught at home where it should be, let the child get an education at school. After that, it is up to the child to make the decision on what she/he believes! Wonder if the "ID" people recall the inate design of a "freewill mind?"

Shalom

The reason that secularists don’t like intelligent design is that it challenges their autocratic hegemony in the field – actually a form of censorship. They are deathly afraid that some poor vulnerable child might be allowed to consider alternatives to their still unproven theory of spontaneous generation and gap filled speciation.

In fact, atheism is as much a “religion” as Catholicism, Unitarianism or Hinduism. Religion is simply adherence to a working model of the universe – theistic or atheistic, which unavoidably eventuates in ultimate values. Those who guard the sanctity of the god-less evolution model are no less an authoritarian Magisterium for their cause than the folks in Rome. Evolution supports the entire superstructure of secularist agendas. If God is acknowledged they would have to share the limelight, as it were – and that is anathema to them. “Give the religious zealots an inch and they’ll take the mile,” they surmise. “We’ll just keep up the separation ruse, and ignore their views. We just can’t have our brilliant, scholarly public school children thinking that God exists, because they might seek to know Him and follow Him, and that would be the end of abortion, free sex, gay rights, socialized everything, etc.

“After all real science is as solid as a fossil. It has never changed; evolutionary theory has been a monolithic truth of truths for over a century now. The very idea of introducing doubts into the minds of our young student parishioners is unthinkable. They must be protected and fully grounded in the Darwinian Catechism. After all, everything is at stake. If teachers even mention that theoretical I.D. tripe, our whole house of cards would be threatened. Even though we have been saying that education is free inquiry, this is certainly an exception. Why, in one year they’ll be singing Do Lord and Amazing Grace in the biology labs. No, our Darwinian truth is too fragile to allow any such heretical challenges. God save King Charles!! I mean, It save . . . uh . . . May he mutate forever?”