Thursday, May 14th, 2009
The Legal Satyricon (one of my favorite and engaging legal blogs) was fortunate enough to host recently sued California teacher James Corbett’s compelling editorial regarding the lawsuit one of his students brought against him for Corbett’s in-class, out of context statement that “creation is superstitious nonsense.” The suit was based on the theory that Corbett violated the Establishment clause, but Corbett ominously suggests that victories in such frivolous lawsuits would lead to chilling of teacher speech:
Every teacher in California (this was a federal case after all) now works with the knowledge that any student, at any time, and in violation of California law, can sneak a tape recorder into a classroom, record the teacher and use an out-of-context five second comment as a bludgeon to threaten, to intimidate and, ultimately, to destroy the teacher’s career and good name.
Read The Legal Satyricon’s synopsis of the case, and then read Mr. Corbett’s outstanding editorial, which I think I will print out and have framed.
Tags: Amendment, California, creationism, establishment, Law, lawsuit, legal, theory
Posted in Government, Law, Religion | No Comments »
Wednesday, March 18th, 2009
Georgia has one of the most severe sex offender laws on the books in the entire nation, and although it was designed to make sure rapists, child molesters, and other criminals who may pose a threat to children are kept in check after serving their time, in practice it puts many people onto the sex offender registry who have never committed a sex offense. The law is drawn so broadly that it includes kidnapping and false imprisonment of minors. According to Rep. David Ralston, lawmakers passed the provision initially because they believed that if a person is convicted of committing a crime of force or violence against a minor, he or she should receive the same punishment that a sex offender would.
In the case of Darnelle Harvey and many others, the punishment certainly doesn’t fit the crime. In 1990, when Harvey was seventeen years old, he participated in robbing a Dairy Queen in Chamblee, Georgia. As the holdup progressed, he brandished a gun and ordered a sixteen year old employee to lie down, and through that action, he was convicted of false imprisonment. After spending seven years in prison, you might think Harvey’s debts had been paid for his crime. But because he was charged with false imprisonment of a minor, Harvey was labeled a sex offender by the state, a stigma he will carry until the day he dies. At age 36 currently, that’s a whole lot of punishment for his mistakes.
Where registered sex offenders work is controlled by the law, and Harvey was recently forced to leave his job doing repair work at the Big Boot Ranch because the ranch hosts parties for children. The owner of the ranch, John Sturdivant, said Harvey “wanted to work, wanted to move his life along.” That’s not an easy thing to do when you cannot legally work within 1,000 feet of parks, schools, recreation centers, or other places children may go. As Sturdivant pointed out, “If you can’t work, you can’t take care of yourself. When you can’t do that, it might lead to robbing or stealing. What’s left?”
Another victim of this law is Donnie Lee Boone, who held up a restaurant in Augusta with two others in 1994. The men moved four employees from one part of the restaurant to another during the robbery, and this earned them a charge of kidnapping. Because one of the employees was seventeen years old… you guessed it. Boone is now a registered sex offender. Boone was granted parole in 2006 after serving almost twelve years in prison. He had planned to move in with his mother, but the parole board would not allow it, claiming her home was within 1,000 feet of a park, a church, and a rec center. Because he was unable to secure another residence, he was forced to stay in prison. In 2007, the law regarding living restrictions was overturned by the courts (the restrictions still apply to where registered sex offenders may work or loiter), but it was not applied retroactively in order to help Boone’s case. As if that wasn’t already unjust enough, last year, an investigator for the Southern Center for Human Rights, Mica Doctoroff, brought to light that the park and church were in fact 2,000 feet from Boone’s mother’s home. And as for the rec center? It didn’t exist. Boone was finally released last year and able to move in with his mother.
This law is in desperate need of revision, and some help may be on the way in a new bill that just passed in the Senate by a 52-2 vote. The bill is now before the House. According to Sen. Seth Harp, “We’re trying to clarify it. We need to concentrate solely on those who really are sex offenders so we know where they are to keep them away from children.” Among other provisions, the legislation Harp is proposing would only require those convicted of kidnapping or false imprisonment to be on the sex offender registry if their crimes involve a sex offense. It’s about time. But is it enough?
I’m sure many of you are all too familiar with the case of another Georgian, Genarlow Wilson, who made headlines when he was sentenced to ten years in prison for engaging in oral sex at age seventeen with a fifteen year old classmate. Although his conviction and the subsequent public outcry over it led the Supreme Court to rewrite the law so that sex between two consenting high school students is now a misdemeanor, the Legislature decided against applying the law retroactively, which means a lifetime of struggle for all those still trapped on the sex offender registry, people like Wendy Whitaker, who has been on the sex offender list for more than 12 years for engaging in oral sex at age seventeen with a male classmate who was just shy of his sixteenth birthday. Now 29, married, and in college studying criminal justice, she has been forced to move three times because of her proximity to places where children congregate, and she is currently battling the courts to get her name removed from the list.
Law enforcement officials in Georgia are wasting their time, attention, and lots of taxpayer dollars on rewriting laws, fighting lawsuits, rewriting the laws again, fighting more lawsuits, ad nauseum. It’s time for them to change the law once and for all so that those who are truly child predators are punished and kept away from children, and those who are not a threat to anyone are allowed to live their lives and be free from the label of “sex offender.”
-Laura
Tags: children, consent, criminal, Georgia, Law, lawsuit, legal, rights, sex, tax, vote
Posted in Activism, Government, Morality, Sexuality | 8 Comments »
Tuesday, February 10th, 2009
Book Review- Monkey Girl, by Edward Humes
Book review by L.Grey, with permission.
In the time of Galileo it was argued that the texts, ‘And the sun stood still … and hasted not to go down about a whole day’ (Joshua x. 13) and ‘He laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not move at any time’ (Psalm cv. 5) were an adequate refutation of the Copernican theory.
Alan Turing, Computing Machinery and Intelligence, Mind 59 (1950), 443.
Monkey Girl by Edward Humes ISBN: 9780060885489, ISBN10: 0060885483 Ecco (imprint of Harper Collins) Hardcover 400 pages, $25.95
What does it mean when proponents of Intelligent Design say “teach the controversy”?
You may think you know what the controversy is about, but you’ll never get a more thorough and up-to-date analysis of the Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District trial than Edward Humes’ book Monkey Girl. The 2005 trial was one of the latest episodes of the seemingly never-ending struggle for the hearts and minds of public school students. This is a fight between those who feel that Science describes nature pretty well, and those who believe that anything other than a strict literal interpretation of the Bible deserves a trip to hell and excommunication from polite society. The trial itself was a gripping account of small-town drama unfolding over the course of a year, of parents and children enduring intimidation and humiliation. Witnesses from both sides turned the courtroom into a fascinating arena of scientific evidence versus faith dressed in science’s clothing. At least three books have come out of the case (see further reading below for details), and Ed Humes’ Pulitzer Prize-winning writing style and even-handed coverage make Monkey Girl a compelling choice. Humes not only covers the case, he describes the town as the trial transforms it:
Dover sits firmly astride the front lines of America’s culture war, occupying the uneasy space between America’s religious faith and its longstanding fondness for scientific progress, between an idealized past and an uncertain future, between education and indoctrination, between the natural and the supernatural. For the next several months, the ninth floor courtroom in the Ronald Reagan Federal Building will belong to Kitzmiller et al versus Dover Area School District, an unintentionally epic lawsuit filed by a group of parents against their evolution-doubting school board. The case does indeed have much in common with the 1925 Scopes Monkey trial, a public spectacle in which Clarence Darrow and the American Civil Liberties Union unsuccessfully challenged a Tennessee law banning the teaching of evolution. But unlike its illustrious predecessor (which, popular imagination and classic films notwithstanding, had exactly no impact on the law or educational practice at the time), the Dover case is positioned to define (or redefine) for decades just what children are taught about where we come from. [prologue, Monkey Girl]
The controversy has shifted a bit since the famous 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, which first questioned the legality of teaching Darwin’s theory of Evolution in public schools. World War II and the Cold War demanded that the United States produce competent scientists. This demand seemed to effectively muzzle fundamentalists for a few decades. High School Biology classes approaching the Theory of Evolution would often involve an uneasy truce involving the words “changes over time” and neatly sidestepping the origins of life. Until reading this book, I assumed that all but the most extreme religious fundamentalists were fine with this truce. Humes’ book shows precisely how much this has changed.
While the book mostly focuses on the Dover trial, Humes also takes us to a similar trial in Kansas, the controversy involving the gift shop at the Grand Canyon, where Creationists have had some success in censoring information about the geological age of the national monument. Most importantly, Humes follows the trail of intellectual and legal deception to the pseudo-scientific think-tank called The Discovery Institute, a group of scientists who exclude any scientific evidence in conflict with Christian Scripture.
The Dover Trial is full of drama and bad debate, A Scopes Monkey Trial for the 21st century, or Inherit the Wind, Redux. Humes shows in the Dover case how Creationism in public schools, having been defeated in courts during the late 20th century under the Separation of Church and State clause of the First Amendment, evolved (pun intended) into the virtually identical Intelligent Design movement, to Dover, Pennsylvania among other places. Some of the most shocking moments of the trial feature the ironic displays of dishonesty which ultimately brought down the school board members who were trying to bring religion into the local biology classrooms. Humes covers the scope of the grand scheme of religious activists, who plan on infusing not only science classes with Christian dogma and bias, but History, Government, and other classes as well.
This very book elicits criticism from those whose definition of “Fair and Balanced” have been warped to Orwellian proportions by Fox News and today’s most hyperbolic propagandists. Humes compassionately portrays how the plaintiffs’ religious beliefs in this case, were attacked and their children mocked at school out of ignorance. The Dover case pitted one kind of Christians against another. Those who favored the separation of Church and State were attacked as “not Christian enough”, in a great example of how the separation of these two functions protects freedom of religion. Another surprising turn of events showed how the presiding judge, a Bush-supporting Republican was branded as a liberal judicial activist for defending the constitution.
While it is clear on which side Humes’ sympathies lie, the reader is necessarily confronted with the heart of the so-called controversy: regarding extreme religious views which by definition do not tolerate any opposing views, what are the limits of tolerance in society? How can a democracy defend pluralism from those whose religious beliefs clash so vehemently with the definition of reality itself by the rest of the world, both secular and religious? The Framers of the Constitution were historically not far away from centuries of religious wars in Europe which constantly threw governments into turmoil. They saw the value of the separation of church and state to both church and state. Back in those days religious persecution meant death or incarceration because of one’s beliefs, not what passes for persecution these days in the minds of some.
One gets the strong impression reading Humes’ insightful analysis, that this latest version of the old Darwin-vs.-God controversy is the product of the removal of Critical Thinking skills from the mainstream public school curriculum, and the lack of a Cold War Era push towards developments in Math & Science, supported by all but the most outspoken of Bible literalists, who constantly attempt to couch the debate as “God vs. Darwin”, when in fact, most religions don’t require people to choose between the two. In my opinion, this is a clear case of the old adage, “Those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it”. Young-Earth Creationists might benefit from not ignoring the history of the Catholic Church’s censorship of Copernicus and Galileo hundreds of years ago, and ask themselves why the Pope doesn’t have a big problem with Darwin’s theories today.
-Philadelphic
Further reading on the Dover Trial: (after the break…)
(more…)
Tags: activists, Amendment, America, ban, banning, belief, bible, bio, biology, Bush, California, Canyon, Casey, Catholic, censor, censorship, children, Christ, church, Civil liberties, Columbia, Constitution, Copernican, Copernicus, Cornel, Cornelius, creationism, creationist, Darwin, death, Democracy, discovery, dogma, Dover, Dover trial, Enterprise, Europe, Evolution, faith, First Amendment, foundation, freedom, fundamental, Galileo, god, Government, history, Hume, Kansas, Kitzmiller, Law, lawsuit, legal, liberal, Logic, Matthew, monkey, movie, Orwell, Oxford, pagan, Pennsylvania, political, Pope, Psalm, Pulitzer, Reagan, Religion, republican, Review, school, school board, Science, Scopes, scripture, secular, Tennessee, theory, tolerance, United States, war
Posted in Review | 1 Comment »
Monday, December 29th, 2008
Camps are forming among the irreligious, based on Michael Newdow’s most recent attempt to break up the government-religious relationship — he’s suing President-elect Obama. Well, not directly, but effectively, through his lawsuit against the use of the term “So help me God” and inaugural prayer. Newdow and others claim that Obama and related officials should leave behind all semblance of religion when ascending the platform that will officially designate Obama as the next President of the United States.
Friendly Atheist is one prominent member of the camp that supports such a notion. He states:
There’s no reason Barack Obama should be swearing an oath to God when he takes office. (If he chooses to do so personally, that’s his decision, but it shouldn’t be part of the official ceremony.) There’s also no reason we should have prayers — in this case, Christian ones — at the inauguration.
Although Friendly Atheist believes that the lawsuit stands about the same chance as Newdow’s failed 2004 lawsuit of the same calibre, he thinks that the upside to such litigiousness is that it brings attention to the secular versus religious issue with regard to government.
On the other side of the aisle is Atheist Ethicist, arguing that because this is an issue of freedom of speech, it should not be fought with violence, but, instead, with speech. Violence, he says, because the court enforces its decisions with the force of the government (i.e., police), in the form of intimidation and sometimes actual force. The proper way to act in retaliation of the decision to meld the pulpit and the presidency is to condemn and criticize, but not prohibit the speech of others, particularly the president’s. Essentially, if we act through the courts to stifle the president’s ability to say a prayer or swear to God, then we make a mockery of our own arguments to protect our own right to not pray or swear to God.
Both arguments have valid points. It’s a good idea to bring to America’s attention that we haven’t always been a “Christian” nation, and that, as Friendly Atheist notes, our allusions to the biblical God were all fabricated and implemented fairly late in U.S. history. And it’s also proper for us to enforce the notion that government is supposed to be separate from religion, at least with regard to endorsement. On the other hand, it’s potentially risky to establish a precedent that we wouldn’t want applied to ourselves or to others, regardless of their belief.
I’ll add something to this. Obama won’t be passing any laws during the inauguration. The First Amendment protects us from Congress passing law respecting an establishment of religion. It’s got nothing to say about the president being sworn in by the Chief Justice, or about an invocation, or if the president-elect wants to wear a turban or a cross or a clown suit.
So, which argument is stronger? The one supporting the lawsuit or the one opposing it? Is there a limit to which rational people should go in pursuit of separation of church and state, and is this the limit?
-Procrustes
Tags: Amendment, America, atheist, ban, Barack, Barack Obama, belief, biblical, Christ, church, Congress, Eden, establishment, First Amendment, freedom, Freedom of speech, god, Government, history, Invocation, Law, lawsuit, Newdow, Obama, police, prayer, president, Procrustes, rational, Religion, secular, theist, United States
Posted in Government, Religion | 7 Comments »
Monday, December 22nd, 2008
I was going to do a best blog posts, taking from other blogs, but after churning through a single month archive of a single blog, I realized that it would take me about a year to accomplish such a feat. So, I’m just going to pick stuff from this blog. It’s not wholly narcissistic, since some of the posts will have been written by people who are not me.
In mostly chronological order:
JNTB debunks the Significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls
—
Philadelphic challenges the idea that there can be “fundy atheists.” in Readings… The Hilariously Bad, The Good, and the WTF
—
Laura analyzes the impact of pro-abstinence laws on public school sex education, in Sexual Education and the Implications of Senate Bill 155
—
Velkyn doesn’t like living within A Culture of Lies
—
Procrustes rants about the meaninglessness of prayer in Mourning Cards and Tornadoes
—
Laura dissects the Watchtower and puts it on display in Jehovah’s Witnesses Unearthed
—
Velkyn debunks Dr. Brandon Carter’s “God did it” claims with regard to those nasty gaps in the universe, in Secrets: God: the Evidence, part of the Unearthed series (which is really very good!)
—
Procrustes addresses Roger Severino’s arguments against gay marriage in Regarding Roger Severino’s “Legalizing Gay Marriage Will Spark Lawsuits…”
—
Procrustes’ early criticism of Obama’s fierce loyalty to Christianity, in Thank God Obama Worships the “Right” God (follow up with The Trend of Obama Doubt)
—
FormerFundy argues that Personal Responsibility is Paramount Especially in the Political Realm
—
Spider details and then skillfully criticizes Catholic World Youth Day 2008
—
Procrustes agrees that we should be teaching creationism in schools, but Why Stop at Creationism?
—
In light of the inability of certain groups to protest outside the Democratic National Convention, Laura questions limits to the right of free speech in Run DNC
—
Procrustes, with help from Velkyn, explores what it means versus what it should mean to be tolerant today in Intolerable Tolerance
—
Apropos, JNTB asks, Would a Christian Bail You Out?
—
As the Bush era is finally ending, many of us acknowledge the fact that it’s not really ending. It’ll take decades, if ever, to undue all the harm he’s caused. Procrustes gives us a reminder of all that harm (if you can stomach it) in More U.S. Anti-Contraception in Africa, Plus a Look Back on Bush’s Anti-Choice Legacy (You can follow up on this by reading Laura’s article: Bush Administration Makes Last Ditch Effort to Diminish Women’s Rights)
—
Laura identifies the Mormons as having a terrible amount of power and coercion in the Proposition 8 debacle, in Proposition 8, the Mormons, and the New “Separate But Equal” (Also see the follow-up: Erasing Decades of Moral Progress with Proposition 8)
—
JNTB questions the American ideological pursuit of spreading democracy in Spreading Democracy?
—
Shar’iah Law Rocks (Unfortunately, literally)
—
JNTB examines the perception of what life is, and what human life is, with reference to Motl Brody, in Life and Death
—
Mutha (rearing her head, finally) discusses what real patriotism is (or should be) in Waiter! There’s Dogma in My Primordial Soup!
—
What’s really the State of Christmas?
—
Procrustes asks, Why is there a Legal Provision Allowing a Lighter Sentence Based on Religious Beliefs?
—
If you hadn’t already heard, Being Religious is Like Eating Sand
—
Laura and Absinthium for their amazing Comics (and I’ll take partial blame for most of them, as I was the idea person, they were the artists — were it not for them, all StOP comics would look like a take-off on xkcd or Stick Figure Death Theater)
—
Finally, and out of order, but appropriate for the time of year, Procrustes asks, Is Banning the Words “Christmas” and “Easter” an Appropriate Secular Goal?
—
There’s so much more that I really enjoy, but I can’t rightly put them all on an end-of-the-year list. If anything, be sure to check out the Unearthed series, which really sheds some light on a variety of religious beliefs. For easy access to all StOP’s articles, see the Archives in easy-to-open/read format in the sidebar. Thanks for reading State of Protest!
(Oh, and if you have a favorite StOP post that’s not on the list, let me know in the comments!)
(man, that’s ugly — My fault!)
Tags: abstinence, administration, Africa, America, archives, atheist, ban, banning, belief, Brody, Bush, Carter, Catholic, Christ, Christianity, coercion, Comic, creationism, Dead Sea, death, Democracy, Democrat, dogma, free speech, fundy, gay, god, human, Jehovah, Law, lawsuit, legal, Logic, moral, Mormon, Motl, Motl Brody, mourning, Obama, political, prayer, Procrustes, rights, school, scroll, scrolls, secular, sex, sexual education, theist, tolerance, Unearthed, universe, World Youth Day
Posted in Religion | 1 Comment »
