Re: Dover Intelligent-Design Case

[JMHACLJ]

In a message dated 12/20/2005 6:19:43 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: With regard to the judge's commentary, what I find the most disturbing is that this particular judge -- a Bush appointee with pretty firm "conservative" credentials -- felt it necessary to preemptively defend not just his decision, but himself, in his opinion.  What does that say for the current social climate and principles of judicial independence?   As for determining what is or is not "science," judges do that all the time when they decide whether or not to allow expert testimony. Actually, I find disturbing the fact that the judge is thinking about whether or not he might need to defend himself.  His decision is either defensible on its own merits, or it is indefensible.  The judge's comments in this regard suggest that he has been reading something other than transcripts, briefs and cases, or listening to something other than his iPod.  Having picked up the flavor of disapproval for a certain category of outcomes on religion cases, he has decided to import squarely into his opinion an argument in justification that simply would not be there if he only did his job and ignored Fox News and/or Radio America.   Jim Henderson Senior Counsel ACLJ

_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.