NOVA producing 2-hour Dover special

I think it is wonderful to see bias opinion in action. And any judge who would prevent something from being expressed based on the opinion that such will cause students to identify with a particular religious belief (as though that really matters) is bias and has demonstrated a contempt for knowledge and the pursuit of truth.

He places governmental restrictions above freedom of thought, expression, and religion.

I think I should get to play myself,

And only a zealot could continue to fail to understand why something that has been demonstrated to NOT BE SCIENCE should ever be taught in a science class.

How can you not grasp this simple concept. We do not teach about lephrecauns in Biology because they are not related to biology, and nor do we teach religion in biology, because, surprise, it is not related to biology. A descion made by A CHRISTIAN JUDGE!




Nip, this is an out and out lie. You know it, I know it. The Global flood was disproven 200 years ago, BY CHRISTIANS! Yet you continue to say this, and continue to fail utterly to produce any actual evidence to the contrary. Put up or shut up. Present evidence, or stop speaking this inanity.

Seriously, go out and read something new other than the same tired old drivel you have been spouting since I came to this board. Its ridiculous how much time and effort people have wasted talking to someone who seems to be compeltely unable to comprehend anything not told to him in his Bible.

I think you need to work on your stage presence before we can let you play yourself.

Upholding the constitution is a contempt for knowledge and the pursuit of truth?


How is preventing a public school system from unconstitutional behaviour restricting freedom of thought, expression, and religion?

Secular Humanistic Uniformitarian Evolutionistic theorizing,

Showing contempt for the Constitution begins when people say they may interpret that document outside it's historic environment. You tell ME just who read what in EVERY public instition openly and without ridicule from BEFORE the radification of the Constitution UNTIL 1963. It was the BIBLE. If that was good enough for George Washinton and Daniel Webster, it is most certainly good enough for me. And if you are silly enough to drag slavery into this issue, I'll have YOU remember that the Constitution needed an Amendment added. So perhaps the DIVIDED Supreme Court should have suggested that before they acted as vigilanties on an issue that had already been decided unanimously in 1897 by the Supreme Court. Show contempt! I'll show contempt for people who have the sick notion that law is all about politics and the latest fashion. Bring something back again and again until one gets the answer they want----that is contempt sir. If they wanted the BIBLE out of Public schools it should have been done legally with an amendment as with slavery and the woman's vote. I cannot tell you that you must believe as I believe, but you have no right to suggest that my beliefs cannot and should not be expressed in any institution of learning as long as there is freedom of speech, expression, and religion in the United States. Anthing less is tyranny in action.