Re: Today is D-Day on intelligent design


"catshark" <catshark101@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1135304739.833038.116930@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Deadrat wrote:
> > "catshark" <catshark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:9g3lq15e5eqgeqmkdaas01d63na4itaiba@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 01:17:56 GMT, "Deadrat" <ephemera1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > wrote:
<snip>

> I don't want to beat this to death, especially in advance of anyone
> indicating any desire to go after the likes of Billy Buckingham, so
> here are a few last thoughts:
>
> I think you are arguing for the law as it should be as you see it,
> while I am arguing an application of the law as it is to an unusual
> circumstance. I know of no similar case similar to this one but I
> think I can argue persuasively for the interpretation I've given. As
> for arguing for the law as it should be, just remember what that got
> the good folks on the Dover board.

Below, you give the law as it is. I agree with it. No liability except
for gross negligence.

<snip>

> And here is the official definition of gross negligence:
>
> Gross negligence means a failure to use even slight
> care, or conduct that is so careless as to show
> complete disregard for the rights and safety of others.
> Willful misconduct occurs when a person intentionally
> acts or fails to act knowing that (his, her) conduct will
> probably result in injury or damage. Wilful misconduct
> also occurs when a person acts in so reckless a
> manner or fails to act in circumstances where an act
> is clearly required, so as to indicate disregard of the
> consequence of (his, her) action or inaction
>
> In my opinion, based on what I know of the case and the factual
> findings of the judge, at least some of the board members were grossly
> negligent and/or committed willful misconduct.

You can make a case.

> They completely
> disregarded the rights of students to be free of government
> proselytization.

But this won't do it. Before the trial, the legal question of ID being
religion was not settled. It is now (in Dover). But you don't get to
argue tunc pro nunc.

> They knew or should have known that their
> *continuing* actions would probably result in damage to the school
> district and failed to act to limit those damages once it became
> obvious that there was a significant chance they would be incurred.

They took the care to consult lawyers, who probably told them they
had a case. Too bad it was TMLC, but they probably fall under the rubric
of "slightest" care.

> > > Knowingly risking the district's money to advance your own interests (which
> > > need not be pecuniary) is *exactly* the same legally.
> >
> > Every board members runs for election on the platform that his or her interests
> > coincide with the district's.
>
> No. I do not consent to have any candidate's religion forced down my
> throat simply because I know s/he is religious.

I have no idea how this is relevant to my comment. Every candidate maintains
that his or her interests coincide with the electorate's. Pursuing one's own interests
that are identical to the majority's isn't a prima facia case for gross negligence.

> > > That they did it
> > > knowingly (at some point, if not necessarily right from the begining) is
> > > demonstrated by their perjury.
> >
> > If they're indicted and convicted, then we'll see.
>
> As noted before, a conviction is not necessary for a finding of civil
> liability but evidence that they did commit perjury can be considered
> on their "guilty knowledge" showing willful misconduct.

I meant we'll see if their perjury demonstrates anything after they're convicted.

<snip>

> > I can't believe I'm defending this dopes.
>
> Hey! Welcome to a lawyer's world!
>
> --
> ---------------
> J. Pieret
<snip>

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Explaining Time Dilation
    ... > SNIP ... predictions are in better accord with the evidence. ... Relativity does not say space 'performs' any physical act - it says ... merely that they are in accord with experiment - which both SR and GR are. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: How to kill babies
    ... Here's the cite: http://tinyurl.com/6lqvtv ... And no one, especially me, -wants- you to act like me. ... Deny, deny, deny and ...
    (rec.scuba)
  • Harshman doesnt seem to understand that natural processes are continuous and sequential in nature
    ... It certainly does postulate that the neoDarwinian mechanism can only ... act on EXISTING FUNCTION. ... I suggest Harshman re live that embarrassment ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: B&B CLOSED
    ... > PART 1 of the Act ... > "personal data" means data which relate to a living individual who can be ... > ect, ect ...
    (uk.rec.naturist)
  • Re: Cumbria rail crash, man arrested
    ... So what you are saying is that any act of gross negligence resulting ... in the death and/or serious injury of an innocent person or persons ... I dont think anybody here really believes that a rare act of ...
    (uk.railway)
Loading