Cobb to decide on appealing

Something tells me the lawyers will tell them to appeal. Something about billable hours.....

A federal judge ruled Thursday that an Alabama school system must remove stickers from high school biology textbooks that say evolution is "a theory, not a fact." Was the judge wrong to declare the stickers unconstitutional? Yes 62% No 34% Don't know 4%

You mean the poll results aren't believable?  I think we should all be familiar with the amount of misinformation, disinformation and erroneous desire to be "fair" or "balanced" that goes into these things.

Engineer Poet worries about the poll.

I expect such a poll out of South Dakota, actually. But I also expect a higher degree of geographic literacy in that state. South Dakota once had a thriving school system that turned out outstanding people, well educated.

Now it appears the Rapid City Journal copy desk can't find Georgia with a map and the help of the Associated Press.

It's a silly nit -- and I will leave it to the Dear Reader to determine whether such nit-picky details are significant, whether they indicate yet another exercise in "don't confuse us with the facts" typical of the anti-evolution mob, or whether it was just a slip of the editor's pen. As a former copy-editor, I thought it amusing, and perhaps a Freudian slip. After all, one expects such backwardness from "the Heart o' Dixie," but not from the glistening, glass and steel city that is so near "the Empire City of the South."

Cobb County Board of Education may feel like they've blown enough taxpayer money defending the defacing of taxpayer-purchased textbooks, defaced in order to appease a bunch of anti-science creationists.

The legal and scientific guns aimed at the stickers will get much bigger at the appeals court stage.

Is it acceptable for the school board to have a closed meeting? They are an elected governmetal entity. Any applicable sunshine laws? Will transcripts be available afterwards?

It is acceptable because they are talking with their lawyers. I have heard that it will be possible to learn how the board voted in the meeting, or maybe they'll come out and do the vote.

I'm deeply offended when I see attacks made not on ideas but instead on the people who hold them

The Clintonista Judge Clarence Cooper needs to get taken down a notch Judge Clarence Cooper is incompetent.

Yesterday I wrote to each member of the Cobb County Board of Education and urged them to create a website asking for donations to support the cost of appeal if such cost was a large issue in their decision. I also said I'd be among the first to contribute. The Clintonista Judge Clarence Cooper needs to get taken down a notch and I'd bet there's millions of people just like me all over these United States willing to pay to have it done.

Attacking the sticker because the people most likely to support it are Christians is anathema to everything the United States stands for.

The first rule taught in Civil Disagreement 101 - "attack ideas not the people who hold them".

I do not agree with anything that DaveScot says but I have to say his opinions, however flawed they may be, does liven things up a bit.

Dave, please review what you are going to say before hitting the Post button. The personal attacks on the Judge were exactly what you were bitching about.

It makes me wonder about you, I truly think that you are not who you say you are, but are instead a gifted satirist having some laughs at the storms you stir up with your inane rantings.

Besides the judge made the right call, the sticker was not only badly worded but put in place because they admittedly put it there to appease the christian parents who were complaining.

I will be publishing a commentary on the Cobb County case sometime next week. As soon as it's up and accessible, I will link it on the blog to which I contribute, Southern Appeal.

Frank

The pro-sticker people are taxpayers in their school district. They have as much right as anyone else to participate in the political processes that decide how to spend those taxes.

The Clintonista Judge Clarence Cooper needs to get taken down a notch and I'd bet there's millions of people just like me all over these United States willing to pay to have it done. I'm not a religious person myself butI'm deeply offended when I see attacks made not on ideas but instead on the people who hold them. The first rule taught in Civil Disagreement 101 - "attack ideas not the people who hold them". Attacking the sticker because the people most likely to support it are Christians is anathema to everything the United States stands for. The constitution guarantees that people will not be discriminated against due to religious belief and that's exactly the type of discrimination that's going on here. Judge Clarence Cooper should be removed from the bench if you ask me for his wanton disregard for such a basic civil right as freedom of religion and freedom from persecution for religious beliefs. His job was to make a decision based on prima facie evidence not the supposed religious bias of the people in Cobb County. Judge Clarence Cooper is incompetent.

I will be publishing a commentary on the Cobb County case sometime next week. As soon as it's up and accessible, I will link it on the blog to which I contribute, Southern Appeal.

Moteworthy is still there. I just don't post on it as much given the traffic on Southern Appeal.

Here's a preview of my article, to whet your appetite:

....Nevertheless, I believe that Judge Cooper rightly concluded that the sticker was unconstitutional, but for the wrong reason. He should have argued that the sticker's assertion about evolution---"it's a theory, not a fact"---is a claim about evolution's factual status that the Board cannot know is true unless evolution is not a fact. But one cannot say that evolution is not a fact and at the same time suggest to students that they should have an open mind on the subject, since having an open mind requires that one critically consider the possibility that evolution is a fact. That is, the policy was not narrowly tailored to achieve its purpose---critical thinking---and it needlessly imported language ("evolution is a theory, not a fact") from sources whose objections to evolution are for the most part religious.

That is, the policy was not narrowly tailored to achieve its purpose---critical thinking---and it needlessly imported language ("evolution is a theory, not a fact") from sources whose objections to evolution are for the most part religious.