An Incompatibility Between Science and Religion? - Page 6 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-14-2009, 04:21 PM   #76
She's the One
martha's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,478
Local Time: 02:53 PM
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
No, we just resent when textbooks, films or teachers go beyond scientific evidence and teach as fact metaphysical claims that evolution renders the idea of a Creator expendable.
Just as public school teachers cannot advocate religion, neither should they be allowed to advocate athesim.

Dude, I'm too busy teaching homosexuality to teach atheism.

martha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2009, 05:18 PM   #77
Blue Crack Addict
Doozer61's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Setting up house on Scooter's Star
Posts: 20,218
Local Time: 01:53 PM

Doozer61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2009, 02:41 PM   #78
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 03:53 PM
Originally Posted by martha View Post
Dude, I'm too busy teaching homosexuality to teach atheism.
In Southern California both undoubtedly being required rather than elective classes.
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2009, 04:05 PM   #79
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
Diemen's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,317
Local Time: 04:53 PM
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2009, 04:08 PM   #80
Blue Crack Addict
anitram's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,441
Local Time: 05:53 PM
Then what do they teach in San Fran??
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2009, 04:17 PM   #81
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
Diemen's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,317
Local Time: 04:53 PM
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2009, 04:23 PM   #82
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 03:53 PM

I would have guessed Blame America First... but close enough.
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2009, 04:57 PM   #83
love, blood, life
A_Wanderer's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:53 AM
It looks like the creationists are taking this approach and legally assaulting palaeontologists
If you think dying can keep you out of court, look at Charles Darwin.

The celebrations of his 200th birthday coincide with an anti-evolution lawsuit that has just landed him on the doorstep of the U.S. Supreme Court.

A Christian schoolteacher from Roseville (Placer County) who takes the Bible literally says a UC Berkeley Web site about evolution is unconstitutional, like a cross in a public park.

The Web site, "Understanding Evolution," is supported by government funds and violates the constitutional separation of church and state, according to the suit by Jeanne Caldwell.

Rebuffed by lower courts, she has appealed to the nation's highest court, and UC joined the battle this week, saying in its response that the Internet is not like a park and that, in fact, Caldwell has no right even to file the suit.

The sides wait to see whether the justices will take the case and tackle the unsettled issue - not of evolution, but of whether the Internet is a public space that needs new principles to enforce the state-and-religion barrier.

At issue is one page, out of 840 on the Web site, that says Darwin's theory and religion can co-exist. The page - titled "Misconception: 'Evolution and Religion are Incompatible' " - also features a drawing of a smiling scientist holding a skull and shaking hands with a smiling cleric holding a book with a cross on it.

Caldwell says UC's government-funded assertion contradicts a religious belief that evolution and religion are incompatible and amounts to a state position on religious doctrine. This violates the establishment clause of the First Amendment barring Congress from making any law respecting the establishment or exercise of religion, she says.

She first sued in 2005. UC thwarted the suit in federal district court and the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco by successfully arguing that Caldwell's exposure to the Web page is too minimal to cause the type of injury that would make her eligible to sue. The lower courts threw the case out based on her eligibility and didn't rule on whether the Web page violates the First Amendment.

The Web page is presented as a resource for teachers, and Caldwell said she visits that section as a teacher and participant in the evolution debates and has the same right to sue as the plaintiff who was allowed to sue over a cross in the Mojave National Preserve.

Allowing the lower-court rulings to stand, Caldwell says in her Supreme Court appeal, "would make government Web sites an Establishment Clause free zone." Because the Internet is increasingly used by the government to communicate with citizens, the Supreme Court needs to address the issue, she says. She is represented by the conservative Pacific Justice Institute in Sacramento and her husband, attorney Larry Caldwell.

Attorneys for UC say the lower-court rulings did not make the Internet immune to such claims but that existing legal principles are sufficient to dismiss Jeanne Caldwell's eligibility to sue. They also say deciding a new standard for the Internet would violate the role of the Supreme Court, which is not to open new legal frontiers but to resolve issues that arise from a body of lower-court rulings.

Roy Caldwell, director of Cal's Museum of Paleontology, the site's sponsor, said some UC officials worry that the high court may want to clarify standards on "standing," or eligibility to sue. (He's not related to Jeanne Caldwell.)

On the eve of Darwin's birthday last Thursday, a new Gallup Poll was released showing that 39 percent of Americans believe in evolution, with 25 percent not believing in it and 36 percent holding no opinion. Among weekly churchgoers, 24 percent believe in evolution and 41 percent do not.
Cal Web site draws anti-evolution lawsuit
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2009, 01:04 PM   #84
Blue Crack Addict
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 25,279
Local Time: 05:53 PM
Student Wins Suit After Teacher Says Creationism 'Superstitious Nonsense'

Monday , May 04, 2009


SANTA ANA, Calif. —
A federal judge ruled that a public high school history teacher violated the First Amendment when he called creationism "superstitious nonsense" during a classroom lecture.

U.S. District Judge James Selna issued the ruling Friday after a 16-month legal battle between student Chad Farnan and his former teacher, James Corbett.

Farnan sued in U.S. District Court in 2007, alleging that Corbett violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment by making repeated comments in class that were hostile to Christian beliefs.

The lawsuit cited more than 20 statements made by Corbett during one day of class, all of which were recorded by Farnan, to support allegations of a broader teaching method that "favors irreligion over religion" and made Christian students feel uncomfortable.

During the course of the litigation, the judge found that most of the statements cited in the court papers did not violate the First Amendment because they did not refer directly to religion or were appropriate in the context of the classroom lecture.

But Selna ruled Friday that one comment, where Corbett referred to creationism as "religious, superstitious nonsense," did violate Farnan's constitutional rights.

Farnan is not interested in monetary damages, said his attorney, Jennifer Monk of the Murrieta-based Christian legal group Advocates for Faith & Freedom.

Instead, he plans to ask the court to prohibit Corbett from making similar comments in the future. Farnan's family would also like to see the school district offer teacher training and monitor Corbett's classroom for future violations, Monk said.

There are no plans to appeal the judge's rulings on the other statements listed in the litigation, she said.

"They lost, he violated the establishment clause," she told The Associated Press in a phone interview. "From our perspective, whether he violated it with one statement or with 19 statements is irrelevant."

In making his decision, Selna wrote that he tried to balance Farnan's and Corbett's rights.

"The court's ruling today reflects the constitutionally permissible need for expansive discussion even if a given topic may be offensive to a particular religion," the judge wrote.

"The decision also reflects that there are boundaries. ... The ruling today protects Farnan, but also protects teachers like Corbett in carrying out their teaching duties."

Corbett, a 20-year teaching veteran, remains at Capistrano Valley High School.

Farnan is now a junior at the school, but quit Corbett's Advanced Placement European history class after his teacher made the comments.

The establishment clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from making any law establishing religion. The clause has been interpreted by U.S. courts to also prohibit government employees from displaying religious hostility.

Selna said that although Corbett was only found to have violated the establishment clause in a single instance, he could not excuse or overlook the behavior.

In a ruling last month, the judge dismissed all but two of the statements Farnan complained about, including Corbett's comment that "when you put on your Jesus glasses, you can't see the truth."

Also dismissed in April were comments such as, "Conservatives don't want women to avoid pregnancies — that's interfering with God's work" and "When you pray for divine intervention, you're hoping that the spaghetti monster will help you get what you want."

On Friday, Selna also dismissed one of the two remaining statements, saying that Corbett may have been attempting to quote Mark Twain when he said religion was "invented when the first con man met the first fool."

Corbett has declined to comment throughout the litigation. His attorney, Dan Spradlin, did not immediately return a message left Monday by The Associated Press.

Spradlin has said, however, that Corbett made the remark about creationism during a classroom discussion about a 1993 case in which a former Capistrano Valley High science teacher sued the school district because it required instruction in evolution.

Spradlin has said Corbett was simply expressing his own opinion that the former teacher shouldn't have presented his religious views to students.

Farnan's family released a statement Friday calling the judge's ruling a vindication of the teen's constitutional rights.

The Capistrano Unified School District, which paid for Corbett's attorney, was found not liable for Corbett's classroom conduct.
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2009, 11:18 PM   #85
Rock n' Roll Doggie
U2DMfan's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 03:53 PM
He should be fired.
Just as much as if he were preaching to those kids.
U2DMfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2009, 04:56 AM   #86
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Kieran McConville's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Auto Dafoe
Posts: 9,787
Local Time: 07:53 AM
everyone's suing people nowadays, gang.

Kieran McConville is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:53 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright ©