Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Revote today [Dover, PA school board]
York Daily Record [Penna] ^ | 03 January 2006 | TOM JOYCE

Posted on 01/03/2006 12:12:37 PM PST by PatrickHenry

Also today, Dover's board might revoke the controversial intelligent design decision.

Now that the issue of teaching "intelligent design" in Dover schools appears to be played out, the doings of the Dover Area School Board might hold little interest for the rest of the world.

But the people who happen to live in that district find them to be of great consequence. Or so board member James Cashman is finding in his final days of campaigning before Tuesday's special election, during which he will try to retain his seat on the board.

Even though the issue that put the Dover Area School District in the international spotlight is off the table, Cashman found that most of the people who are eligible to vote in the election still intend to vote. And it pleases him to see that they're interested enough in their community to do so, he said.

"People want some finality to this," Cashman said.

Cashman will be running against challenger Bryan Rehm, who originally appeared to have won on Nov. 8. But a judge subsequently ruled that a malfunctioning election machine in one location obliges the school district to do the election over in that particular voting precinct.

Only people who voted at the Friendship Community Church in Dover Township in November are eligible to vote there today.

Rehm didn't return phone calls for comment.

But Bernadette Reinking, the new school board president, said she did some campaigning with Rehm recently. The people who voted originally told her that they intend to do so again, she said. And they don't seem to be interested in talking about issues, she said. Reinking said it's because they already voted once, already know where the candidates stand and already have their minds made up.

Like Cashman, she said she was pleased to see how serious they are about civic participation.

Another event significant to the district is likely to take place today, Reinking said. Although she hadn't yet seen a copy of the school board meeting's agenda, she said that she and her fellow members might officially vote to remove the mention of intelligent design from the school district's science curriculum.

Intelligent design is the idea that life is too complex for random evolution and must have a creator. Supporters of the idea, such as the Discovery Institute in Seattle, insist that it's a legitimate scientific theory.

Opponents argue that it's a pseudo-science designed solely to get around a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that biblical creationism can't be taught in public schools.

In October 2004, the Dover Area School District became the first in the country to include intelligent design in science class. Board members voted to require ninth-grade biology students to hear a four-paragraph statement about intelligent design.

That decision led 11 district parents to file a lawsuit trying to get the mention of intelligent design removed from the science classroom. U.S. Middle District Court Judge John E. Jones III issued a ruling earlier this month siding with the plaintiffs. [Kitzmiller et al. v Dover Area School District et al..]

While the district was awaiting Jones' decision, the school board election took place at the beginning of November, pitting eight incumbents against a group of eight candidates opposed to the mention of intelligent design in science class.

At first, every challenger appeared to have won. But Cashman filed a complaint about a voting machine that tallied between 96 to 121 votes for all of the other candidates but registered only one vote for him.

If he does end up winning, Cashman said, he's looking forward to doing what he had in mind when he originally ran for school board - looking out for students. And though they might be of no interest to news consumers in other states and countries, Cashman said, the district has plenty of other issues to face besides intelligent design. Among them are scholastic scores and improving the curriculum for younger grades.

And though he would share the duties with former opponents, he said, he is certain they would be able to work together.

"I believe deep down inside, we all have the interest and goal to benefit the kids," he said.

Regardless of the turnout of today's election, Reinking said, new board members have their work cut out for them. It's unusual for a board to have so many new members starting at the same time, she said.

"We can get to all those things that school boards usually do," she said.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: bow2thestate; commonsenseprevails; creationisminadress; creationisthisseyfit; crevolist; dover; downwithgod; elitism; fundiemeltdown; goddooditamen; godlesslefties; nogod4du; victory4thelefties; weknowbest4you
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 1,061-1,070 next last
To: CarolinaGuitarman
Natural selection is not a random process.

The theory of how it happened may not be random, but why it happened certainly is. And besides, the theory that life somehow began from a primordial soup is most certainly random, without purpose or explanation. This in and of itself does not make it wrong (though I believe that it is wrong), just describing what it is.

521 posted on 01/04/2006 11:54:55 AM PST by Zack Nguyen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 387 | View Replies]

To: CarolinaGuitarman

Well, I gotta go for now. Duty calls. I appreciate your willingness to discuss this topic without getting angry. I'm sure we'll debate again.


522 posted on 01/04/2006 11:56:03 AM PST by puroresu (Conservatism is an observation; Liberalism is an ideology)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 516 | View Replies]

To: puroresu
Group differences are a mainstay of junk science. I seldom see them discussed except by people who have a vested interest in being in the superior or privileged group.

I would like to start a discussion on the rather obvious IQ difference between people who accept evolution and those who don't. I notice, for example, that many FR posters deny common descent, but actual scientists like Behe (an ID supporter) mostly accept common descent.
523 posted on 01/04/2006 11:57:43 AM PST by js1138 (Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 512 | View Replies]

To: tortoise
Given that there is no objective measure for "design" and "purpose" . . .

There is no objective measure for "natural" and "supernatural" either. Be that as it may, the common definitions of "design" and "purpose" make the connection with intelligence to be a reasonable one. Not an irrefutable one, to be sure, but it is not a wild stretch by any means.

524 posted on 01/04/2006 12:00:14 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 515 | View Replies]

To: joesbucks; betty boop; hosepipe
Thank you for your reply!

I still believe that the ID movement is more about backdooring a way into the Creation story versus an alternative scientifically based hypothisis. It was a Trojan Horse from all things people of faith.

That is your opinion - and sadly, there are quite a few who truly believe that evolution is the main power play for atheism as an ideology - along with all its political agenda.

IMHO, we need to lay aside all of our presuppositions and look at the intelligent design hypothesis on its merits.

For now, it simply is saying somethings are unexplainable without a Creators hand. Unfortunately, there's not a lot of science behind that.

To the contrary, the intelligent design hypothesis says "that certain features of the universe and life are best explained by intelligent cause rather than an undirected process such as natural selection".

An "intelligent cause" could be either a phenomenon (such as an emergent property of self-organizing complexity or fractal intelligence) or an agent (such as God, collective consciousness, aliens, Gaia, etc...)

Something as simple as animals choosing their mates could be established as the "intelligent cause" for "certain features".

IOW, it doesn't matter whether the "intelligent cause" was a phenomenon or an agent. And it doesn't cover "all features" - i.e. the hypothesis is not a theory of origins, just like the theory of evolution is not a theory of origins.

525 posted on 01/04/2006 12:00:19 PM PST by Alamo-Girl (Monthly is the best way to donate to Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 490 | View Replies]

To: puroresu

ID *is* PC.

ID requires us to redefine words. It elevates feelings to the level of facts.

It's every bit as dangerous as the original.


526 posted on 01/04/2006 12:01:35 PM PST by highball ("I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 517 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe
I think you have nailed it like a Butterfly or Moth on a bugboard..

LOLOLOL! Great imagery! Thanks for your post!
527 posted on 01/04/2006 12:02:56 PM PST by Alamo-Girl (Monthly is the best way to donate to Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 493 | View Replies]

To: js1138

You're quite welcome, js1138!


528 posted on 01/04/2006 12:03:20 PM PST by Alamo-Girl (Monthly is the best way to donate to Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 500 | View Replies]

To: Zack Nguyen
" The theory of how it happened may not be random, but why it happened certainly is."

Natural selection is not a random process. By definition.

"And besides, the theory that life somehow began from a primordial soup is most certainly random, without purpose or explanation."

This is outside of evolution. You are referring to abiogenesis theory. It too is not random. It's based on the laws of chemistry, which are certainly not random. It certainly isn't without explanation either.

"This in and of itself does not make it wrong (though I believe that it is wrong), just describing what it is."

It describes it, but incorrectly.
529 posted on 01/04/2006 12:03:52 PM PST by CarolinaGuitarman ("There is grandeur in this view of life...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 521 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; joesbucks; betty boop; hosepipe
"I still believe that the ID movement is more about backdooring a way into the Creation story versus an alternative scientifically based hypothisis. It was a Trojan Horse from all things people of faith."

That is your opinion - and sadly, there are quite a few who truly believe that evolution is the main power play for atheism as an ideology - along with all its political agenda.

It's more than an opinion - it's the admitted purpose of both the Discovery Insitute, the main proponent of ID, and the school board in this case.

Conversely, I challenge you to find any scientific organizations promoting the ToE that have atheism as a stated goal.

530 posted on 01/04/2006 12:05:28 PM PST by highball ("I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 525 | View Replies]

To: puroresu
"Well, I gotta go for now. Duty calls. I appreciate your willingness to discuss this topic without getting angry. I'm sure we'll debate again."

I didn't get angry? I knew I forgot something.

You GHF%%$#$#@!!! lol

:) Duty calls here too. Later!
531 posted on 01/04/2006 12:05:40 PM PST by CarolinaGuitarman ("There is grandeur in this view of life...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 522 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
The issue of motive of the supporters (on any side) is a legal sidebar.

Actually, motive is rather central. If the First Amendment were only about free speech, then the ID folks would have a free hand in government schools -- and so would everything else. But there is also the establishment clause. Free speech doesn't allow government agents to violate the establishment clause. That's why it's a necessary condition of state action that it must have a secular purpose.

532 posted on 01/04/2006 12:07:41 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 511 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

OH NO!!!!!

It's happening in my very household. When I went to the grocery store the other day my 13 y/o daughter asked "Dad, can I come along?"

And we TALKED! About stuff that MATTERS!!! And she contributed mightily to the discussion.

Where did I go wrong?


533 posted on 01/04/2006 12:09:16 PM PST by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852

Sure they can. They can take what they studied in science, compare it to what they have studied in church or discussed with their parents, and make up their own mind.

Knowledge and information are funny that way, learn it here, apply it there.


534 posted on 01/04/2006 12:11:15 PM PST by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: js1138

You wrote:

#####Group differences are a mainstay of junk science. I seldom see them discussed except by people who have a vested interest in being in the superior or privileged group.#####

Then you wrote:

#####I would like to start a discussion on the rather obvious IQ difference between people who accept evolution and those who don't.#####

I'll assume you were joking!


535 posted on 01/04/2006 12:13:27 PM PST by puroresu (Conservatism is an observation; Liberalism is an ideology)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 523 | View Replies]

To: highball
I challenge you to find any scientific organizations promoting the ToE that have atheism as a stated goal.

It would be too objectionable for scientific organizations to have this as a stated goal. Better to have it as an unstated principle and then have it established by law as the only principle suited to scientific discussion.

536 posted on 01/04/2006 12:14:03 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 530 | View Replies]

To: tortoise; betty boop
Thank you for your reply!

All qualia are grounded in physical, measurable phenomona. How directly and precisely one measures it is a function of technical capability.

Then what is the measure of right and wrong, good and evil, pretty and ugly and cute, pain and pleasure?

Moreover, whatever "ruler" you might wish to use, all that can result is yet another description of "it" - a quantization of a continuum of such measurements - and does not tell us what "it" is until we actually and directly experience "it".

Or to put it another way, one can describe an animal until he is blue in the face - develop vast piles of data comparing the animal to all kinds of other things - and still not know what the animal "is".

537 posted on 01/04/2006 12:14:15 PM PST by Alamo-Girl (Monthly is the best way to donate to Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 520 | View Replies]

To: highball; betty boop
Conversely, I challenge you to find any scientific organizations promoting the ToE that have atheism as a stated goal.

How about people in positions of great power over scientific organizations who are promoting the theory of evolution and have atheism as their stated goal?

In which case, as Exhibit #1 - I offer to you Richard Dawkins.

538 posted on 01/04/2006 12:19:02 PM PST by Alamo-Girl (Monthly is the best way to donate to Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 530 | View Replies]

To: puroresu

You are obviously on the right side of the curve.


539 posted on 01/04/2006 12:19:58 PM PST by js1138 (Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 535 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Thank you for your reply!

Actually, motive is rather central. If the First Amendment were only about free speech, then the ID folks would have a free hand in government schools -- and so would everything else. But there is also the establishment clause. Free speech doesn't allow government agents to violate the establishment clause. That's why it's a necessary condition of state action that it must have a secular purpose.

And that is the problem with the Lemon test - and the reason the Supreme Court already doesn't like Lemon and will no doubt move to repair the mess it has created once Alito is on the court.
540 posted on 01/04/2006 12:21:45 PM PST by Alamo-Girl (Monthly is the best way to donate to Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 532 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560 ... 1,061-1,070 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson