Nuisance Lawsuit Against Scott and NCSE Withdrawn

As someone unfamiliar with the details of the case prior to reading this, I would suggest it does seem like the corrections include one important piece of information that I could see how someone like Caldwell would be upset about. The article basically lumps ID and Creationism together, as is appropriate in a science setting. However from Caldwell's perspective they might be completely different things. He might see creationism as religion and ID as science, and to attribute the jehovahs witness book to him might seem offensive.

Of course his remedy available would be to sue. So he sued, and the article was changed. Claiming defamation seems like a legal strategy to force the corrections. Nasty lawyers.

Such is life in America.

Dr Scott wrote:He never informed us that he had dismissed the case (which is apparently not legally required, but certainly would have been courteous)

Wow, they sort of sound like radical muslims. Except for using killing as their terror weapon, the fundamentalist christians are using the US legal system. So, the question becomes, who scares you more? Radical muslims or radical fundamentalist christians. For the record, I'm a conservative ideologue.

The fact that the prepetrator of violence happens to be a christian is meaningless unless he claims to be defending christianity by his violent act. And then it is still meaningless in the larger sense because other christians will condemn the violence and call for the prosecution of the criminal. We are still waiting for the muslims who will stand up and say that muslim terrorists do not go to heaven and get 72 virgins but in fact go to hell for their violent acts against innocent persons.

Flash Gordon:

http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2001-09/13/article25.shtml

Note the dateline: September 13, 2001.

It took me 20 seconds of Googling to find. Maybe we should put that particular canard to rest, OK?

This is a bit of a generalization. There are occasional Christian extremists who use violence, such as shooting medical doctors or setting off bombs during the Olympics. That's jsut in this country, I won't mention Northern Ireland.

Yes, you're correct. That was a generalization as every person should be respected based on their own merits and should not be criticized for their beliefs. Perhaps I could have been more succinct by stating the "religion" or "mindset" of fundamentalist christians. However, I wasn't referring or insinutating that they are violent. On the contrary, I was pointing out the fact that they choose to use the law to force their views on others. The fact that they use the law scares me more than a group of individuals that use violence. That was my original intent. Is that clearer?

Interesting tactic. All he had to pay was filing fees. He didn't even have to pay for service of the complaint (though, it would be interesting to know whether Mr. Caldwell told the court that he had not bothered to effect service).

I can think of several people I'd like to sue in order to get them to shut up. If all I have to pay is filing fees . . . hmmmm.

Alas, I doubt the legal expertise of anyone on the ID side would contain the common sense advice to keep quiet.

The article basically lumps ID and Creationism together, as is appropriate in a science setting. However from Caldwell's perspective they might be completely different things. He might see creationism as religion and ID as science

This is a bit of a generalization. There are occasional Christian extremists who use violence, such as shooting medical doctors or setting off bombs during the Olympics. That's jsut in this country, I won't mention Northern Ireland.

We are still waiting for the muslims who will stand up and say that muslim terrorists do not go to heaven and get 72 virgins but in fact go to hell for their violent acts against innocent persons.

Jeez, sounds like a creepy guy.

He doesn't bother to tell people 'by the way, that lawsuit thing, I've withdrawn it.' Moreover . . .

He denies the advocacy of ID, but speaks at the Biola ID conference in 2004. He denies in 2005 having even heard of the creationist books submitted to the district, but denies that he submitted them during a meeting in 2003. He denies a creationist viewpoint but allies with Cornelius Hunter. A quick read of Hunter's books makes it obvious what Hunter's viewpoint is. What comes to mind? Oh yeah "If it acts like a duck, and quacks like a duck . . . . . ."

He does promote something called a 'quality science education policy' but there's nothing of quality, scientific value, or educational interest. What does he do anyway? - oh yeah, he's a lawyer, apparently with a little too much time on his hands. Sounds like a creepy guy.

'The fact that the prepetrator of violence happens to be a christian is meaningless unless he claims to be defending christianity by his violent act.'

Not so.

' And then it is still meaningless in the larger sense because other christians will condemn the violence and call for the prosecution of the criminal.'

Using your logic above, religion has nothing to do with that but rather the secular society we live in. In times past, this 'condemnation' didn't occur because the society viewed persecution based on religion as part and parcel of life.

'We are still waiting for the muslims who will stand up and say that muslim terrorists do not go to heaven and get 72 virgins but in fact go to hell for their violent acts against innocent persons.'

Please, many have. And I would argue that while the terrorist acts were terrible events, many millions of smaller events occur daily in the name of a variety of religions. Pick you poison but don't presume one worse than the other based on these actions.

Lenny Wrote:

"The pro-Ireland side (many, but not all, of which are Catholics) want unity with the Republic of Ireland; the pro-England side (many, but not all, of which are Protestant) want unity with Britain."

Pretty fair analysis there Rev, but no-one asked us Brits if we actually want unity with the six counties. Referendum held in NI, referedum held in RoI, nothing in the place that gets to pay for it all....

...what's that line about taxation and representation ?

ID-sympathetic blogger Denyse O'Leary has covered this case prominently, and approvingly, in her "Post-Darwinist" blog, e.g.
http://post-darwinist.blogspot.com/2005/06/california-academy-of-sciences-settles.html
I wonder if she will post any kind of update?

Pretty fair analysis there Rev, but no-one asked us Brits if we actually want unity with the six counties. Referendum held in NI, referedum held in RoI, nothing in the place that gets to pay for it all.......what's that line about taxation and representation ?

Re Ross and Lenny:The conflict here has been going on for hundreds of years back to when Prince William of Orange ascended to the throne of England and even before that.It is not a question af the people of England wanting the "six counties". Northern Ireland is part of the UK although not Great Britian. During the last war many people (both protestant and catholic) gave their lives for GB even though there was no conscription here.

While it is true that some people may have been motovated to commit murder by religous issues I would say that very few of the actual terrorists themselves were "born again believers". Lenny is correct when he says that the situation here is mainly political but its not a case of the people wanting to be part of England as Northern Ireland is already part of the UK.

Although the riots this week were awful (Cloghfern corner was like a scene from Iraq) thankfully there were no lives lost and I think overall the situation is better since the Belfast agreement.

As I've probably said before a lot of the protestant churches here are fundamentalist and preach a young Earth creationist message. Even in my own church (Abbots Cross Presbyterian) the minister believes that the Earth was created with the appearance of age 6,000 years ago. Answers in genesis is pushed heavily and we have had a few speakers from the US over the years (Dr. David Menton of AIG and more recently Roger Oakland of Understand The Times International). Both are funamentalist speakers.

My own view on origins is probably the same as C.S.Lewis (who was born, and spent his childhood in Northern Ireland ). ie a theistic evolutionist. This is the position the church in general takes and one which AIG are totally opposed to. I do not accept the young Earth position and find the whole thing utter nonsense. I think there are certain things in science that should be treated as fact, like the Earth is round, that it goes round the sun and not the other way around, or that it is not 6,000 years old. The fact that some scientific facts disagree with the Bible should not be important to a person's faith. I don't think that scientists are out to prove that God does not exist !

Ken Ham constantly makes the statement "Where you there" ?. Well we might not have been there but when we look into the night sky we see into the past. The HST has completely changed our view of the universe. The new James Webb telescope (which will replace Hubble in a few years time) will hopefully be just as successful. The new telescopes being built in southern Chile will also provide a view of the early universe which thus far we have been unable to achieve. How Young Earth Creationists can continue with their present position in the face of such insurmountable evidence to me is a mystery.

On a final note Belfast is one of the most interesting cities in the world geologigally speaking. We have Dykes,sills,volcanic plugs (Slemish Moutain) minerals which are found nowhere else , a volcanic plataeu, and the giant's causeway to name but a few. Clearly 65 million years ago Northern was a very violant place (from a geological point of view)!

And by the way Ross the people of Northern Ireland pay taxes to the exchequer just the same as the people in the rest of the UK !

Peter,

NI does pay tax but it doesn't begin to cover the financial cost of the place. I love the people of NI (and one in particular), I just want a vote on what my taxes get spent on! The RoI got to vote without having to fund anything. I say, make the EU pay! ;-)

My father's family were from Larne, my wife is from West Belfast. Of the two groups of relatives (who never meet), most have pretty much the same view on evolution as your own but the only NI YEC's I've encountered have been from the protestant strand (no surprise) but not that many. Oddly, the NI Catholics seem unfazed entirely by evolution but our Australian Catholic neighbours refuse to believe that anything that might possibely be described as 'evolution' could have taken place at all. They would appear to be ID's perfect target demographic - can't stand evolution as a concept, don't go big on literal interpretation of the bible, would love to be able to think that there was "something else".

Hi Ross. Nice to have met you on the PT. I have lived here all my life and I still can't understand some of the hatred that exists in this province. Although I am a protestant I have a great admiration for the catholic community here. I don't think anyone from the "opposite side" has ever done me a bad turn.

I know Larne pretty well as I worked as a chemist in the power station located there for 13 years. The people of Northern Ireland are very conservitive in their thinking and are not always understood by outsiders.

I'm also a member of the IAA (the Irish Astronomical Association). The first lecture of the new season is by professor N Chandra Wickramasinge of Cardiff University and it's entitled "where are we in our search for origins". It should be interesting. I wonder if he will mention the YEC's or the ID movement ? If he doesn't I will in the Q&A section afterwards ! I'll also mention both this site, talkorigins and NCSE as well as AIG if they wan't to look at some creationist astronomy etc. !

I suppose this is yet another exercise in public relations. People will know that there was a lawsuit over an allegedly libellous article, that the article was withdrawn and corrected, and that's all the creationists want them to know. It won't get above most people's horizons that the suit was a nuisance suit that was withdrawn when it had had its PR effect.

Same as that case in Cupertino of a teacher suing the school district for objecting to his lessons where he was, according to some of the students, talking about God the whole time. He and some conservative branches of the press were referring to this as a case of the school district claiming that it was unconsititutional to teach about the Declaration of Independence because their godless political correctness had spiralled out of control. People still refer to this poor guy and the DoI being under attack in the liberal cesspits of California, not realising that there was a lot more to it at the time than just the DoI and that all but one of the teacher's complaints have been thrown out by the courts and the final complaint was set to be heard next month. And then the teacher dropped the lawsuit. I don't know about anybody else, but the dropped-lawsuit bit and the throwing out of the complaints bit weren't very widely reported, and most people don't know about them. The impression that's been left is the one the Religious Right wanted to leave, and the press, as usual, seems to have lost interest.