Intelligent design
- Started
- Last post
- 690 Responses
- discipler0
nah, activist judge is an accurate description for judges who have an agenda to get their personal views implemented, rather than being impartial and honestly weighing the evidence.
- ukit0
Sorry Discipler - this was the first big legal test for ID, and a ruling that will set precedent for future decisions. There was no ambiguity in the ruling - it was wholesale defeat.
- discipler0
"Reaching well beyond the immediate legal questions before him, Judge Jones offered wide-ranging and sometimes angry comments denouncing intelligent design and praising Darwinian evolution."
"Judge Jones found that the Dover board violated the Establishment Clause because it acted from religious motives. That should have been the end to the case," said West. "Instead, Judge Jones got on his soapbox to offer his own views of science, religion, and evolution. He makes it clear that he wants his place in history as the judge who issued a definitive decision about intelligent design. "
- no-spin-zone0
So If I personally agree with Roe v. Wade, but (possibly) will-be Justice Alito does not.
And current law dictates that it is not illegal to have an abortion.
Is Potential Justice Alito an activist Judge, Discipler?
- discipler0
doubtful, ukit. This is the decision of a single judge with a bias and it does not change the science - this is key. This is simply the result of a judge who is uncomfortable with the implications of the science and who conflates the science with it's implications.
People are smart, they are going to look into the science of the issue.
- discipler0
The trouble with your example, no spin, is that you are comparing an issue of morality which impacts human life, with an issue of science. In the Dover case, you have a judge who ignored the overwhelming scientific evidence and made a decision based on implications that he personally was not comfortable with.
- no-spin-zone0
As far as I know a Creator has never been proven scientfically.
Pardon my ignorance if I am wrong.
- discipler0
No, it hasn't. You are correct. Nor does ID try to prove a creator. ID simply observes Specified Complexity and Digital Code in biological systems and logically infers design.
It's about following the evidence wherever it leads. Even if it makes some people uncomfortable because of their cherished world view.
- ukit0
This is a sad, sad day for Flying Spaghetti Monsterism.
- discipler0
and as we speak, ukit, a "groundbreaking" legal decision is on it's way to being over-turned:
- no-spin-zone0
So if it cannot be scientifically tested, how is it science?
Again, I am no scientist but if a Creator cannot be tested, how is this valid.
I mean no offense, but you speak of people's "cherished world view".
Could that not also be applied to the proponents of ID that are part of religious organizations?
Isn't creation/intelligent design their "cherished world view"?
- discipler0
This is the beginning of a cultural conflict and many MANY court cases to come. It's going to be interesting to watch as the censorship machines move forward, full throttle and try to spin the religious/political slant.
- ukit0
I don't neccessarily have a problem with the sticker. I mean, it is a theory. If the ID folks need to go to such ridiculous lengths to make themselves feel better, then I'm cool with it.
- discipler0
Actually it can be tested, no spin. It's propaganda to say otherwise. SETI researchers and archaeologists have been deciphering when something is information (Specified Complexity) or whether it's the product of unguided mechanisms, for decades.
ID is nothing new. It's about observing and testing Specified Complexity. Only in the realm of biological systems.
- no-spin-zone0
I mean no disrespect, but it sounds like a bunch of Mumbo Jumbo to me.
Does the Creator have a son named Jesus?
I'm going to lunch before I offend someone.
- no-spin-zone0
The trouble with your example, no spin, is that you are comparing an issue of morality which impacts human life, with an issue of science. In the Dover case, you have a judge who ignored the overwhelming scientific evidence and made a decision based on implications that he personally was not comfortable with.
discipler
(Dec 20 05, 09:33)Also, this is just being disingenuous, by the way.
Activism is Activism.
The term "aActivist Judge" did not appear in any of my Poli Sci books in college. It was purely invented in the past few years.
- discipler0
ID cannot determine who the designer is (unless they find an autograph on a molecular machine). So, determining the identity of the designer is not science, it is philosophy.
- version30
i want it
- version30
600