Posted on 04/06/2006 1:32:45 AM PDT by balch3
Joe Manzari and Seth Cooper’s article today in The American Enterprise Institute Online brings this dirty little secret into the public light.
A few months ago when the ACLU announced that they “generously” would only demand $1 million in attorneys fees for the Kitzmiller case, the casual observer probably thought nothing of it.
However, once the facts are examined, as Manzari and Cooper nicely lay out, the attorneys fees collected by the ACLU are not merely the cost of losing a lawsuit, but rather look much more like a fat taxpayer funded gift to the ACLU & AUSCS.
Manzari & Cooper explain in detail how the newly elected Dover Area School Board, which campaigned on removing the ID policy actually chose to keep the policy during their first meeting. Why? Because the Board members understood that removing the policy could have ended the legal controversy. Without the school board deciding to keep the policy, the same policy that board publicly opposed, the ACLU & AUSCS may not have been able to claim attorneys fees.
(Cooper and Manzari's incredible findings stand regardless of whether the authors may have missed the point that one board member, Bryan Rehm, had not yet had his election certified when the vote took place. If the best response the Darwinists can muster is to nitpick one paragraph about Bryan Rehm while failing to refute the entire piece's discussion of evidence of alleged collusion, then perhaps the Darwinists are missing the forest for the trees, just so they can attempt to dismiss this embarrassing scandal!)
In essence, the new Dover school board was fully aware that keeping the policy in place increased the risk of expensive attorneys fees. Manzari & Cooper explain why it now appears that there was collusion between the ACLU, AUSCS, and Dover school board members. If what Manzari and Cooper say is true, this alleged collusion allowed the school board to effectively guarantee the Kitzmiller decision at a purchase price of $1 million dollars. This appropriation of public funds should be cause for outrage. Check out the Manzari & Cooper article for more shocking details
The judge was a W. apointee, the IDers brought their A-game witnesses, and lawyers from the Thomas Moore Law Center (by no means legal slouches) represented the defense.
Just how was this a kangaroo court?
It's important to keep in mind that, even if there was some vast conspiracy between the new school board and the ACLU, that the conservative Bush-appointed judge issued a sweeping ruling against ID creationism, and that the conservative voters of Dover thrashed the old ID creationist school board at the polls.
The courts are full of judges appointed by Republican presidents who didn't turn out to be so conservative when they started making rulings. The voters of Dover were clearly intimidated by the prospect of huge legal fees.
What is especially clear is that the old ID creationist school board was kicked to the curb by the voters.
I first met Judge Jones over a decade ago. In all my dealings with him, he has been extremely fair. He is a loyal Republican and a devout Lutheran.
Just because you disagree with a legal opinion on religious grounds doesn't mean the judge presided over a kangaroo court.
Quit thumping a Bible and go to law school if you want to analyze the decision. As for ID vs. evolution, take a couple of basic science classes before pretending you have a clue on the issue.
Beating a dead horse PING.
What, are you scared people may get some truth about God from "bible thumpers?"
Why don't you read the bible then go to law school maybe it would give you a clue about where "laws" and rights are derived...
Don't insult your own intelligence by referring to the court as a kangaroo court.
And as a different poster pointed out, take a coulpe of lessons in basic science before venturing to discuss scientific topics; such lessons will make you look less of a an ignoramus when you post the next time (on this topic).
The TRUTH???? Whose truth.
How about the Catholic Churches truth. Is is such a stretch to think that one CAN believe in God and believe in Evolution TOO???
some of the RC position.
Concerning biological evolution, the Church does not have an official position on whether various life forms developed over the course of time. However, it says that, if they did develop, then they did so under the impetus and guidance of God, and their ultimate creation must be ascribed to him.
Concerning human evolution, the Church has a more definite teaching. It allows for the possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms, under God’s guidance, but it insists on the special creation of his soul. Pope Pius XII declared that "the teaching authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions . . . take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—[but] the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God" (Pius XII, Humani Generis 36). So whether the human body was specially created or developed, we are required to hold as a matter of Catholic faith that the human soul is specially created; it did not evolve, and it is not inherited from our parents, as our bodies are.
Please take note of this important distinction.
Dover ping.
Sounds like an attempt by anti-evos to find someone to blame for their major defeat. Kinda reminds me of at least one 20th-century historical example...
...And as a different poster pointed out, take a coulpe of lessons in basic science before venturing to discuss scientific topics; such lessons will make you look less of a an ignoramus when you post the next time (on this topic).
Wow, you boys didn't even waste any time to get to the personal attacks. He didn't even mention science, and you both are already attacking him on it (not to mention attacking his religion). The "take a science course" must be a reflex type posting. As for the "go to law school" comment, maybe you should address it to the author of the article and explain from your vast legal knowlege why he is wrong.
Where in the Constitution is Evolution established ?
This is rich. The creationists Intelligent Design proponents knew going in that this was going to end up in the courts, but they invited that, because they were sure they would win, which would open the door for creationism Intelligent Design to be taught everywhere. But now, in retrospect, and only because they lost, the creationists Intelligent Design proponents cry foul because the new Dover school board didn't preemptively render the forthcoming decision moot.
Long after checkmate, the creationists Intelligent Design proponents yelp about having not been offered a draw prior to the checkmate.
Irrelevant to this discussion. However, there are a lot of things not established in the Constitution.
Since it doesn't mention gravity, for example, I suggest you nail your feet to the ground to prevent flying off into space. /sarc
I'm sure some of the freepers who keep the files and time lines of the trial handy will be along shortly to demonstrate the exact truth you're attempting to distort.
Besides, tell us how the writer of this garbage concludes that the legal team the Dover citizens hired wouldn't still have rights to collect their fees or even that the conservative judge would have allowed the charges to be dropped after the trial was over and he was finishing stages of work on his exactly correct decision?
As the trial so clearly demonstrated, there is practically no limit to the easily exposed lies and distortions the dishonest creationists will stoop to in their losing attempt to undermine the science education of American students. No one really expects anything more than another barrage of lies and misinformation from these miserable losers after they've been soundly beaten in court.
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.