Judge hammers ID creationists - Calls school board liars!

[astro]

Judge rules against ‘intelligent design’

The ruling (pdf file)

[astro]

IMHO this is a great victory for American education!

[astro]

This is apparently already being hashed over in GD in a longer thread. Would a passing mod please close this one.

[Bricker]

That’s a very well-written opinion.

[astro]

@Bricker

That’s a very well-written opinion.

I am stunned by how explicit the Judge was. There was no pussy footing in his wording.

H. Conclusion
The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts
of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board’s ID Policy violates the
Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the
seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and
moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious,
antecedents.
Both Defendants and many of the leading proponents of ID make a bedrock
assumption which is utterly false. Their presupposition is that evolutionary theory
is antithetical to a belief in the existence of a supreme being and to religion in
general. Repeatedly in this trial, Plaintiffs’ scientific experts testified that the
theory of evolution represents good science, is overwhelmingly accepted by the
scientific community, and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the
existence of a divine creator.
To be sure, Darwin’s theory of evolution is imperfect. However, the fact
Case 4:04-cv-02688-JEJ Document 342 Filed 12/20/2005 Page 136 of 139

137
that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not
be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in
religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific
propositions.
The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the
Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals,
who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would
time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID
Policy.
With that said, we do not question that many of the leading advocates of ID
have bona fide and deeply held beliefs which drive their scholarly endeavors. Nor
do we controvert that ID should continue to be studied, debated, and discussed. As
stated, our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an
alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom.
Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an
activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court.
Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction
on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a
constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an
Case 4:04-cv-02688-JEJ Document 342 Filed 12/20/2005 Page 137 of 139

138
imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the
Board’s decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which
has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers
of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal
maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources.
To preserve the separation of church and state mandated by the
Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution,
and Art. I, § 3 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, we will enter an order
permanently enjoining Defendants from maintaining the ID Policy in any school
within the Dover Area School District, from requiring teachers to denigrate or
disparage the scientific theory of evolution, and from requiring teachers to refer to
a religious, alternative theory known as ID. We will also issue a declaratory
judgment that Plaintiffs’ rights under the Constitutions of the United States and the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania have been violated by Defendants’ actions.
Defendants’ actions in violation of Plaintiffs’ civil rights as guaranteed to them by
the Constitution of the United States and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 subject Defendants to
liability with respect to injunctive and declaratory relief, but also for nominal
damages and the reasonable value of Plaintiffs’ attorneys’ services and costs
incurred in vindicating Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights.
Case 4:04-cv-02688-JEJ Document 342 Filed 12/20/2005 Page 138 of 139

139
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. A declaratory judgment is hereby issued in favor of Plaintiffs pursuant
   to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201, 2202, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 such that
   Defendants’ ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause of the First
   Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and Art. I, § 3 of
   the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
2. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 65, Defendants are permanently enjoined
   from maintaining the ID Policy in any school within the Dover Area
   School District.
3. Because Plaintiffs seek nominal damages, Plaintiffs shall file with the
   Court and serve on Defendants, their claim for damages and a verified
   statement of any fees and/or costs to which they claim entitlement.
   Defendants shall have the right to object to any such fees and costs to
   the extent provided in the applicable statutes and court rules.
   s/John E. Jones III
   John E. Jones III
   United States District Judge

[twickster]

The breathtaking inanity of the
Board’s decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which
has now been fully revealed through this trial.

Day-um!

[h.sapiens]

I’m doing a happy dance in my computer chair right now.

Favorite quote from the article:

“We conclude that the religious nature of ID would be readily apparent to an objective observer, adult or child," Jones said.

That just about says it.

[Kyla]

It is ironic that several of these individuals,
who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would
time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy.

Holy cow!

As
stated, our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an
alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom.

Yes!!

What effect will this ruling have in other cases?

[ratatoskK]

Here’s another excerpt from the decision:

Throughout the trial and in various submissions to the Court, Defendants vigorously
argue that the reading of the statement is not “teaching” ID but instead is merely “making
students aware of it.” In fact, one consistency among the Dover School Board members’
testimony, which was marked by selective memories and outright lies under oath, as will be
discussed in more detail below, is that they did not think they needed to be knowledgeable about
ID because it was not being taught to the students. We disagree.

[ratatoskK]

And there’s more…

In summary, the disclaimer singles out the theory of evolution for special
treatment, misrepresents its status in the scientific community, causes students to
doubt its validity without scientific justification, presents students with a religious
alternative masquerading as a scientific theory, directs them to consult a creationist
text as though it were a science resource, and instructs students to forego scientific
inquiry in the public school classroom and instead to seek out religious instruction
elsewhere.

[NurseCarmen]

Judges really really don’t like being lied to.

[NurseCarmen]

An interesting tidbit from the CNN website:

Jones – an appointee of President Bush, who backs the teaching of Intelligent Design – defended his decision in personal terms.

“Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist court,” Jones writes.

[NurseCarmen]

Darnit. I didn’t get the whole quote.

Jones – an appointee of President Bush, who backs the teaching of Intelligent Design – defended his decision in personal terms.

“Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist court,” Jones writes.

“Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on intelligent design, who in combination drove the board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy,” he said.

[Scott_Plaid]

@astro

IMHO this is a great victory for American education!

Personally, I think this is a great tragedy for the American community of Flying Spaghetti Monsterists!

[Hypno-Toad]

A victory of intelligence over Intelligent Design.

A wow, such strong language from a judge! I like the way he summed things up. I should bookmark that ruling for the next time I get prosyletized by a creationist.

[WordMan]

Yay. Just - yay.

It is one small step for clear-headed thinking and calling of bullshit in what will be a never-ending battle that in this day and age seems to move inexorably in favor of the opposition.

But all the same - yay.

[Scott_Plaid]

@WordMan

what will be a never-ending battle that in this day and age seems to move inexorably in favor of the opposition.

I seem to remember the same thing being said by Jules Feiffer, decades ago. He had a disillusioned salaryman, morning all the good causes that failed, among them civil rights of blacks and feminists. The overall tone was that nothing really changes. However, we know see that the side that does not let up does succeed.

[Revtim]

I absolutely love the “breathtaking inanity” line. What an awesome smackdown.

And good for President Bush for appointing this guy. Judge Jones is going to get reamed by a lot of the people in his party, and he knows it, but he still put the partisan politics aside. Good choice by Bush, you gotta give him some credit.

Eww, that felt weird to type…

[Scott_Plaid]

Oh, I almost forgot.

Scott does the Snoopy Happy Dance

Link to a [del]Hamsterdance[/del]Snoopy Dance page

[Tuckerfan]

What’s Latin for “pwn3d!”?