Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (99351)	2/8/2005 5:22:14 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793728

I guess you think I am joking when I ask who or what is the Intelligent Designer? The reason I ask is that we have zero scientific evidence that an Intelligent Designer exists. So Intelligent Design can't be a scientific theory. It's not a coincidence that ID is being advanced by creationists. We aren't working in a vacuum here. The law has to past the Lemon test, as stated in the Creation Science case, Edwards vs. Aguillard: "The Establishment Clause forbids the enactment of any law "respecting an establishment of religion." 3 The Court [482 U.S. 578, 583] has applied a three-pronged test to determine whether legislation comports with the Establishment Clause. First, the legislature must have adopted the law with a secular purpose. Second, the statute's principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion. Third, the statute must not result in an excessive entanglement of government with religion. Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 612 -613 (1971). 4 State action violates the Establishment Clause if it fails to satisfy any of these prongs." caselaw.lp.findlaw.com In that case, the defendants argued that God wasn't necessarily the Creator, just as you are arguing that God wasn't necessarily the Intelligent Designer. The response to that is, "I may have been born at night, but it wasn't last night." Judges are not stupid. No peer-reviewed paper in support of Intelligent Design has been published to date. One paper in support of ID was published in a journal which is ordinarily peer-reviewed, by an editor who slipped it past the peer review process. The journal's board has denounced the article and the subterfuge. Typical fundamentalist-creationist intellectual dishonesty.