Discovery Institute Reacts To Dover Case

[Light_of_Reason]

Here is a link to the Discovery Institute's reaction to the Dover case for those that want to follow what they have to say.

 

http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/in...0and%20Articles

 

I regard Judge Jones as an activist in this case not because I disagree with the outcome of his decision (although I do), but because I disagree with the injudicious and overreaching manner in which he framed his decision.

 

It is a standard principle in good constitutional jurisprudence that a judge should only go as far as necessary to answer the issue before him. So if a judge can decide a case on narrow grounds, that's what he ought to do. He shouldn't try to to use his opinion to answer all possible questions. In the present case, Judge Jones found that the Dover board did not act for a legitimate secular purpose. Instead, he determined that board members acted for clearly religious reasons. Having made this determination, the specific policy adopted by the Dover board was plainly unconstitutional under existing Supreme Court precedents. End of story. There was no need for the Judge to launch an expansive discussion of whether intelligent design is science, whether there is scientific evidence for the concept, whether it is inherently religious, whether Darwinism has flaws, or whether Darwinian evolution is compatible with faith. A judge who actually adheres to the idea of judicial restraint would not have ventured into these other areas, because they were completely unnecessary for the disposition of the case.

 

Already this guy is out of the gate with criticism that the judge answered in his official judgement.

 

Jones acknowledged the fact that he could have stopped at any point on any number of grounds. He said that he did not do that, however, because this case would determine precedent for ID legal battles, and therefore needed to be as thorough and clear as possible on as many points as it could examine.

 

So, here in the first bit where this guy says that he is not calling Jones activist because he disagrees with the ruling, the guy has already proven himself wrong because his reason even in this instance is that he disagrees with the ruling.

[Samurai Tailor]

"Judge Jones was mean, therefore he is an activist."

 

Jesus fuck, people. Take your ass whoopin' standing up. Don't spend your last breath whining.

[Stormwarden]

Note: The only time people call them activist judges is when the judges rule against them.

[MrSpooky]

I'd like to see some convicted murderers whinge about "activist judges."