All too often we make the mistake of believing that ‘law’ and ‘justice’ are synonymous.
"Justice is incidental to law and order
." J.Edgar Hoover
1.When I think of America, it is a place where
each of us makes the rules for our own lives, our own happiness, it is a place for self-determination. The boundaries are spelled out in the only document the American people have agreed to be governed by: the United States Constitution.
It is very specific as to what the federal government can control about each of us. And that document covers the executive branch, the legislative…..and the judiciary.
In fact, nowhere in the document does it give the judiciary the powers it has purloined.
2. Let's consider where we 'draw the line.'
If the Supreme Court either voted ‘aye’ on a bill, or created its own laws, as it all too often does, for example, that mandated that every American view Hitler and his concentration camps in government building, and boo accordingly, every day (OK…so you read
1984), even though we all agree about Hitler,…..
would the passage of this law be acceptable? Think about that….because we are there already.
Can you find the authority in the document above?
3. OK, we all hate Hitler, but where is there an authority in the law, to insist that everyone hisssss and boo at Hitler?
There is no such authority? OK….now check this out:
In 1996, the Alabama State Board of Education voted to place labels inside biology textbooks stating (in part): “This textbook discusses evolution, a controversial theory some scientists present as a scientific explanation for the origin of living things, such as plants, animals, and humans. No one was present when life first appeared on Earth. Therefore, any statement about life’s origins should be considered as theory, not fact.” The labels continued: “Evolution also refers to the unproven belief that random, undirected forces produced a world of living things.” Norris Anderson, “The Alabama Insert: A Call for Impartial Science,” Access Research Network, May 15, 1996. Available online (June 2006) at:
The Alabama Insert - A Call for Impartial Science: Anderson, Norris.
" As one who was involved with promoting the Alabama Insert I can honestly say that
I am unaware of any attempt to use the Insert to bring creationism into the classroom.
On the contrary, the reasons for supporting the Insert were
to keep religious indoctrination out of the science classroom, whether it be theistic or anti-theistic, and to promote full disclosure of both the strengths and weaknesses of all scientific theories."
The Alabama Insert - A Call for Impartial Science: Anderson, Norris
4. Be clear: the word “unproven” is accurate. It is correct.
In 1996, biologists Scott Gilbert, John Opitz, and Rudolf Raff wrote in the journal
Developmental Biology: “Genetics might be adequate for explaining
microevolution, but microevolutionary changes in gene frequency were not seen as able to turn a reptile into a mammal or to convert a fish into an amphibian
. Microevolution looks at adaptations that concern the survival of the fittest, not the arrival of the fittest…. The origin of species—Darwin’s problem—remains unsolved.”
"And let us dispose of a common misconception. The complete transmutation of even one animal species into a different species has never been directly observed either in the laboratory or in the field." Dean H. Kenyon (Professor of Biology, San Francisco State University), affidavit presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, No. 85-1513,
Brief of Appellants, prepared under the direction of William J. Guste, Jr., Attorney General of the State of Louisiana, October 1985, p. A-16.
5.
If there is no proof for Darwin’s Theory, what is the harm in the Alabama Board of Education placing that sticker in the textbook? From a legal perspective….do they have the right? If the Board was an elected body by the people of the state, do they have a say in what is taught?
BTW.....
“Two-thirds of Americans say that creationism should be taught alongside evolution in public schools,” according to the New York Times.
Teaching of Creationism Is Endorsed in New Survey
But even among those persuaded of Darwin’s theory, “18% said that evolution was ‘guided by a supreme being.’ “ Ibid.
Freedom of thought, it seems, is an inconvenience to those with a position to protect…and an income to insure….and an ideology to support.
Where is the legal authority to tell Americans what to believe????
