…and this is a 
What to do when the other side doesn't argue in good faith?
Category: Creationism
Posted on: August 5, 2008 12:20 PM, by PZ Myers
John Freshwater, the Ohio science teacher who uses his classroom to proselytize and promote creationism, is following a familiar tactic: LIE.
Supporters of a middle school science teacher facing firing for burning crosses into students' arms were in the majority at a central Ohio school board meeting.
They gave John Freshwater a standing ovation when he rose to speak Monday night during the two-hour Mount Vernon school board meeting. He attended the meeting to say he has never branded or burned anyone.
This reminded me of chapter 5, "Never said it", in Lauri Lebo's excellent book on the Dover trial, The Devil in Dover(amzn/b&n/abe/pwll). This is the part of the book where the lawyers for the prosecution are trying to get an injunction to prevent the school board from going through with their attempts to promote ID in the classroom, and they bring in the defendants, Buckingham, Bonsell, and others, to corroborate the arguments documented in the press that they were looking for textbooks that blended evolution and creationism. And to the obvious consternation of the lawyers, they all simply lied and claimed that they'd never said it and the reporters had all made everything up. It was patently dishonest, but it essentially blocked the injunction and let them go ahead with their scheme.
Don't worry, the chapter ends on a good note: Lebo gets footage from a local television that shows they lied, which will later come to good use in the actual trial.
It's always disturbing to see how readily these creationists will lie for their own ends, and how happily their supporters will cheer for the lie.
Politics
Comments
Posted by: J | August 5, 2008 12:29 PM
It's always disturbing to see how readily these creationists will lie for their own ends, and how happily their supporters will cheer for the lie.
Disturbing? No, not anymore. It's boringly predictable now. It's gotten to the point where rolling my eyes is ITSELF getting cliched.
Posted by: Patricia | August 5, 2008 12:29 PM
After the OJ case I'm a complete cynic. He can probably get away with it with enough fanfare and lies.
Posted by: Sastra | August 5, 2008 12:29 PM
Never burned anyone? I can see him trying to explain that his "science experiment" wasn't an intentional act of branding, but of course it made a burn if it made an image. Or is he going to argue that dye forms by electricity?
I think religious people get very comfortable with a kind of doublethink that allows you -- encourages you -- to believe two opposing things at once, and feel comfortable with that. The story they want to believe becomes true the more faith they have in it. Facts come after faith. That's a very dangerous inversion.
Posted by: Glen Davidson | August 5, 2008 12:30 PM
Their "integrity" is bound up in a "larger Truth," and it is the latter that must prevail when a conflict exists regarding "honesty".
If an additional "reason" needs to be provided, it's that the "children are being lied to" by the evolutionists.
Most really don't know how to check their behavior except against their (dishonest) religion. It is their standard for judging the world that they're defending, so from the organism's standpoint it makes absolutely no sense to allow the "standard of Truth" to suffer just for the sake of telling not telling "white lies" to their evil adversaries.
That it's a problem to tell lies for the "Truth" they do know, but their own sense of being is threatened when they do not. Hence, they lie.
And all of the truth-telling by the other side can be considered to be an "exception"--and it is.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: black wolf | August 5, 2008 12:33 PM
Christian taqqyia?
Where is that in the Bible?
Posted by: SC | August 5, 2008 12:35 PM
The other side is arguing in good faith, which is the problem. :)
Posted by: Barklikeadog | August 5, 2008 12:36 PM
Yeah but he's still getting fired, right?
Posted by: scooter | August 5, 2008 12:36 PM
cheering for a lie is the foundation of their commonality
Posted by: BlueIndependent | August 5, 2008 12:37 PM
So much for all that 10 Commandments garbage. Although when one sees the world as if it is already doomed and everyone else but you is destined for eternal fire, lying is somehow warranted, because really, who's it going to hurt? Can't commit a sin if you're lying against the devil right?
Shameless, pathetic liars.
Posted by: Les Lane | August 5, 2008 12:39 PM
The actual Buckingham video for those who haven't seen it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6X9ALB448E
Posted by: David Wiener | August 5, 2008 12:40 PM
I often argue with moderately religious people that if they don't follow all of the precepts of the Bible then they are disobeying God's word. From this I receive back an unending list of rationalizations - but they never face up to actual question being asked. It is as if there is a gigantic mental blind spot in the minds of the faithful.
Anything that causes dissonance becomes, apparently, invisible to their mental processes. I really think they do not know they are lying, which is why they seem so damn earnest: They think they're telling the truth.
Oh well, you cannot reason rationally with the irrational. I think perhaps a real dialog is impossible.
Regards,
David
Posted by: Matt Penfold | August 5, 2008 12:40 PM
When I the OJ case was in trial there was a lot of coverage of it here in the UK.
I have to say that informed opinion did not think much of the way the police handled the investigation. More than one police officer, or retired police officer, thought that had an investigation been as badly handled here in the UK the case would never have been allowed to go to court.
Posted by: scooter | August 5, 2008 12:42 PM
Patricia
Oj and every other millionaire ever accused of offing their wife. Extremely common, nothing about the OJ case was the slightest bit unusual.
OJ and Blake just happened to have been on TV before, so the general population of mindless zombies recognized them.
"Look, honey, it's what's name."
Posted by: Apsaras | August 5, 2008 12:42 PM
I suppose when your intellectual forbearers were willing to kill people in defense of their god, fibbing must not seem like that big of a deal.
Posted by: Will E. | August 5, 2008 12:43 PM
Are we really surprised at what these people do anymore? Jesus comes before anything with folks like this. Reminds me of some relatives when I was a kid, the things they said. Everything was for Jesus--you had to be thinking about him all the time in whatever you did. I mean, what if he came back and you were doing something he didn't approve of, like going to a movie, or watching MTV, or telling a dirty joke? What if you were thinking about something else besides him? He'd know, too. These people tell lies but they're thinking of Jesus, which is like making a promise or a bet while you're crossing your fingers: it doesn't count!
Posted by: GirBoBytons | August 5, 2008 12:45 PM
Is that exagerrated or did he really burn crosses into student's arms? I would want more than a firing. I am not a parent but I know for sure if my child came home with a cross burned into their arm, I would totally lose my shit. If he has children of his own I feel sorry for them. I find it interesting that you, PZ, teach college students(adults), do not talk about your particular beliefs in the classroom but express them on your free and personal time and they wanted you fired but a man who teaches children(and young teens), tries to force his views on their impressionable minds and obviously their bodies and he gets a standing ovation? The world we live in saddens me sometimes. ::sighs::
Posted by: Jimbob | August 5, 2008 12:45 PM
We should keep asking these folks why they keep ignoring #9!
My guess is that quite a few won't know what that means!
;-)
Posted by: Matthew | August 5, 2008 12:46 PM
Anyone reminded of the Godfather II by this whole scenario? Just as Pentageli is about to testify against Michael he sees Tom Hagen walking into the courtroom with Pentangeli's brother by his side. After seeing this, Pentangeli suddenly can't remember ANY illegal shenanigans! Michael Corleone? A criminal? Nope. Never said it! I'm not aware of ANY illegal behavior on Michael Corleone's part!
Posted by: BobC | August 5, 2008 12:48 PM
Of course "he has never branded or burned anyone" is lying. I never saw a more obvious lie. I read about this lying yesterday on two news websites and it was not possible to leave a comment to point out how dishonest this wacko is. There was nothing in the news websites about the photograph of a cross burned into a student's arm.
I noticed most Christians are lying pigs. Also, I noticed the more religious a Christian is, the more likely he's a stupid asshole.
Posted by: Bob L | August 5, 2008 12:49 PM
Doubtless Freshwater turned his life over to Jesus and Jesus wanted Frehwater to lie. Nothing better than an invisible superman to justify acting like a low life.
Posted by: raven | August 5, 2008 12:49 PM
Some friends of mine, a couple, professionals with high paying jobs, used to live in the area.
They moved to SoCal without much in the way of explanation.
It is understandable now.
It is easy to understand Freshwater. Just another christofascist moron with the morality of a slime mold. It isn't easy to understand why a significant fraction of the community support him. Hate, lies, and terrorism, it isn't just for Al-Qaeda anymore.
Posted by: Josh | August 5, 2008 12:50 PM
A little OT in this thread, but those of you who are unfamiliar with Lebo's book might want to check it out. I thought it was terrific.
Posted by: SEF | August 5, 2008 12:52 PM
Unfortunately, that does happen.Posted by: Tyro | August 5, 2008 12:53 PM
IANAL, but from what I understand lying like this is very damaging, isn't it? Case in point, Martha Stewart wasn't convicted of fraud, she was convicted of lying to federal investigators. If this guy lies to the wrong person it can sink his legal case.
Posted by: Andrés Diplotti | August 5, 2008 12:56 PM
Well, there's a reason they're called godbots:
"You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour, except where it would conflict with the previous commandments."
Posted by: SEF | August 5, 2008 12:57 PM
It never was. The Christians were at it in their own way before the Muslims even had their extra prophet. And of course there were other groups before that!Posted by: JJR | August 5, 2008 12:57 PM
So they've graduated from Liars for Jesus (tm) to Perjurers for Jesus? Wow.
Posted by: Kobra | August 5, 2008 12:59 PM
He branded their fucking arms?! Doesn't that cause permanent damage and risk infection? Also, couldn't he be tried in court for torture?
Posted by: raven | August 5, 2008 12:59 PM
True. Scooter Libby was also convicted of obstruction of justice or perjury rather than an actual crime.
It's been known for decades that it isn't the crime that nails these clowns, it is the coverup.
Some things never change. First rule of screwups, "when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
Posted by: barklikeadog | August 5, 2008 1:00 PM
It's only perjury if done in court right?
Posted by: SEF | August 5, 2008 1:01 PM
They do still have to catch him at it though, ie with evidence which even the local lie-lovers running the case can't ignore.Posted by: Qwerty | August 5, 2008 1:02 PM
They have to lie so then can have their "biblical truth."
Posted by: Gingerbaker | August 5, 2008 1:03 PM
Sastra said:
"I think religious people get very comfortable with a kind of doublethink that allows you -- encourages you -- to believe two opposing things at once, and feel comfortable with that. The story they want to believe becomes true the more faith they have in it. Facts come after faith. That's a very dangerous inversion."
I think you are right on the money, Sastra. I am fascinated by this whole concept of religious "faith", and its consequences.
I think that there is a decisive moment of religious inculcation when the initiate receives his "faith" lecture, and is asked to affirm his belief in God/ Jesus/ Mohammed. A moment when he realizes he is being asked to step over a precipice and forever relinquish his faculties of reason, and subsume his self to the gravimetric field of the cult.
And when they take that step, they not only believe their beliefs without evidence, they believe their beliefs despite the evidence to the contrary. This is an active self deception.
And, as you say, all that is required to maintain their worldview, and to dissolve any spiritual or logical doubts is more belief, more "faith". And so, the maintenance of individual and communal (cult) faith becomes a badge of honor, a symbol of their love of self, their god, and of their cult. The measure of their community value is how much of a spiritual warrior they can demonstrate by banishing doubt, banishing true introspection, banishing reason.
I wonder if the cult of religion can be broken by eliciting recall of the moment when reason was joyfully surrendered.
Posted by: JJ | August 5, 2008 1:03 PM
# 16 - he really did burn crosses into the arms, the Tesla coil, or whatever he used did that. I guess he calls it something other than burning.
OT, in Dover, because the school board members lied, Judge Jones decided not to issue an injunction and go forward with a trial. If they had been truthful, he would have issued an injunction, tehre would not have been a trial.
I highly recommended Lebos' book.
Posted by: Alan Chapman | August 5, 2008 1:04 PM
The proper way to deal with people like this is to completely and utterly ostracize them. This is also the best and most effective way to deal with racists. Do not do business with them, do not hire them, do not work for them, and do not help them. Tell them to get lost. They are low-life losers.
Posted by: I am so wise | August 5, 2008 1:05 PM
Christianity is, frankly, designed to allow and even prompt implicitly these things. Given that Mr. Freshwater only has to find his religious guru of choice, confess his sin, and all is forgiven.
As for the Christian reaction and inaction regarding these lies, I think Dan Dennett says it best:
Until priests and rabis and imams and their flicks explicitly condemn by name the dangerous individuals and congregations within their ranks, they are all complicit.
Daniel C. Dennett, Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon, (New York: Penguin Books, 2006) 301
Posted by: raven | August 5, 2008 1:05 PM
Here on the WC there was a substitute teacher in Sisters, Oregon who did a 0.2 X 1Freshwater. He lasted about 2 weeks and the school district tossed him ASAP. Very few people were sorry to see him go.
Sounds like there is something drastically cuckoo in central Ohio. Glad I don't live there.
Posted by: Carlie | August 5, 2008 1:06 PM
He seems to be forgetting that there are pictures of a kid's arm after he burned it. Unless, that is, he's going to argue that the kid did it to himself in a bizarre conspiracy plot.
Posted by: Barklikeadog | August 5, 2008 1:06 PM
JJ tell me about Lebo's Book. I'm in the ozone today and can't get what you talking about. I'm interested. Maybe I missed sumthin.
Posted by: ildi | August 5, 2008 1:06 PM
Lying (by omission, at the very least) seems to be a fluid concept when souls are in danger; at least, that is my experience with my charismatic Catholic brother. He neglected to tell my mother that he was taking her to a healing mass (speaking in tongues included) even though she still pined for the good ole Latin mass for Christ's sake!
"And quit trying to shake my hand during mass," she'd grumble; "and what's up with that hippie guitar music?" (All this in Hungarian, of course.) I accidentally spilt the beans, and I was the bad guy for "talking her out of it" when she didn't want to go.
I finally realized that pretty much everything he would try to get me involved in would have a religious context when he asked me if I wanted to go to a coffee shop to listen to some folk musicians, and it turns out it was one of the church socials at the local parish hall.
Now, we hike.
Posted by: Matthew | August 5, 2008 1:07 PM
"It is as if there is a gigantic mental blind spot in the minds of the faithful.
Anything that causes dissonance becomes, apparently, invisible to their mental processes. I really think they do not know they are lying, which is why they seem so damn earnest: They think they're telling the truth."
Think of it this way: Survival of the fittest believer.
In other words, the "believers" that allowed rational debate to sway them are in fact no longer believers any more. They're ex-believers. By their very nature, the strongest and longest-serving believers MUST be able to justify their irrational views, and they MUST have processes on their brains that allow them to think the way they think, even in the face of such massive evidence to the contrary.
Unlike science, you can't be a fundamentalist christian and not believe in ALL the bible. It's either all true, or none of it is true. And to them it cannot be false, it IS NOT FALSE and so it must all be true. It's usually not dishonesty, just a function of the brain attempting to cling on to a belief system that sustains their existence and "explains" what they're doing on this little blue ball we call Earth.
To most believers, even regular non-fundamentalists, the thought or idea that we're on this planet for no particular reason is just absurd.
Posted by: Michelle | August 5, 2008 1:11 PM
Predictable. They always lie.
Posted by: SEF | August 5, 2008 1:12 PM
NB The previous news accounts (note the huge red scabby cross on the arm in that picture) had claimed he was fired already but the latest ones say it was only a suspension pending a hearing to decide whether to really fire him. :-/
Posted by: Emmet Caulfield | August 5, 2008 1:13 PM
Not necessarily. In Ireland we have "Commissioners for Oaths" in front of whom you can give sworn statements and depositions "under penalty of perjury", so there are circumstances where perjury can be committed outside a courtroom. Given that our legal systems have a common root, I'm sure it must be similar in the US.
Posted by: Blake Stacey | August 5, 2008 1:16 PM
The device used to mark the student was a BD-10A High Frequency Generator. The late Jeff Medkeff described its effects as follows:
50 kilovolts will do that to you.
Posted by: SEF | August 5, 2008 1:24 PM
ie the Blue Collar Scientist.Posted by: craig | August 5, 2008 1:25 PM
They're lying to themselves, why is it surprising that it's a small step from that to lying to others?
They aren't lying despite their religion. Religion needs lying to survive. Lies are what religion is made of.
OF COURSE the devoutly religious lie to others when their "faith" is threatened. It's not an aberration, it's a reflex. It's why they're religious in the first place.
Posted by: El Herring | August 5, 2008 1:31 PM
Andrés Diplotti #25 wins the thread!
Maybe all the commandments could be rewritten Asimov-style. They all seem to have cop-outs of some sort or other.
Posted by: Ryan F Stello | August 5, 2008 1:35 PM
From the video that Les Lane linked (#10),
But of course: one thing flows from the other doesn't it?
Posted by: Yoo | August 5, 2008 1:36 PM
Freshwater and his supporters are living proof that a god belief doesn't instill morality; in fact, their god belief steered them into immorality.
Posted by: Kristine | August 5, 2008 1:38 PM
So...he now claims that he didn't burn anyone, and his supporters cheered?
*brainfart*
So...his supporters now think that burning kids is wrong? And they want to believe that he didn't do it? Or -
His supporters know he's lying, and are applauding his lies?
*brainfart* (Just give it up, Kristine.)
Posted by: Pygmy Loris | August 5, 2008 1:42 PM
I was browsing through the minutes of the June 20 meeting where the Freshwater case was discussed.
One specific offense was that he petitioned in 2003 to teach creationism and ID in the classroom. When his request was denied he went ahead and taught them anyway.
Also, the manual for the generator he used to burn student specifically states that people should come "in contact with the high voltage output of this device." Apparently disregarding the instruction manual for a device while using it to cause bodily injury to students is bad.
Here's a bit more about specific instances of teaching religion:
I especially love the logic that because homosexuality is a sin, homosexuals must have chosen to be that way.
You can find the minutes for that meeting
here
It looks like he's going to get fired. The resolution to initiate proceedings against him passed unanimously and there are four distinct violations that are each grounds for termination.
If some teacher burned my (as yet nonexistent) child, I would file criminal charges.
Posted by: El Herring | August 5, 2008 1:46 PM
Thinking about this some more...
Do the commandments have a heirarchy? What if you had to lie to save a person from certain death? Does "Thou shall not kill" trump "Thou shalt not bear false witness"? There must surely be countless situations where breaking a commandment is unavoidable.
Also, there are apparently two sets of commandments. Whoa. I'll stop there.
Posted by: Dave | August 5, 2008 1:47 PM
Im going to nitpick here a bit: The plaintiff's attorneys did not request a preliminary injunction, so Judge Jones never had the opportunity to rule on one. The plaintiff's attorneys decided not to because the school board members lied during depositions. Further, had the plaintiffs requested a preliminary injunction and Judge Jones granted it, a trial is still possible. While most sensible defendants, once faced with the Judge ruling that the plaintiffs are "likely to prevail on the merits" of the case, are motivated to settle, and even the non-sensible ones have this explained to them in small words by their attorneys, in this case, the record indicated that neither the defendants nor their attorneys were particularly sensible.On the topic at hand, I am trying to picture Freshwater's mental gymnatics, the best I can come up with is something along the lines of, "I am a good teacher, I would never harm a student. I gave a harmless demonstration involving electricity, it is not my fault that the student subsequently developed stigmata in the shape of a cross. (Which just happens to be the shape I used in the demonstration.) Really, this just proves the existence of HAYSUS! Its a miracle! HalleyloooooYa! Pass the Ammo.
Posted by: CJ | August 5, 2008 1:48 PM
I seem to recall that Buckingham (sp?) from Dover case managed to squirm out of a perjury charge by saying he was on oxycontin when he either made original statement or when he lied, although not positive which. Judge also said something along the lines of "you are lucky I don't have you charged with perjury" to one of liars.
The Christians are certain that evolution is the evil root of secularism, which has been deemed their religious crusade "enemy." Without an enemy, what fun is it? Didn't you ever have a "club" or tree house?
The evangelicals I have encountered have no problem rationalizing their main philosophy--yours are sins, mine are sacrifices for Jesus.
Posted by: Holy Space Ghost | August 5, 2008 1:55 PM
Liars for Jeebus(tm)
Making Baby Jeebus cry since...oh...35CE.
Posted by: Tim | August 5, 2008 1:57 PM
Pity Anton LaVey's not around, I'm sure he'd have a very interesting comment. Possible them IDers signed up to the wrong superstition?
Posted by: Dave K | August 5, 2008 1:58 PM
Carlie (#38): Actually, they're claiming that the photo is doctored and the kid is lying:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/04/usa2
Posted by: Pygmy Loris | August 5, 2008 2:00 PM
Also, the manual for the generator he used to burn student specifically states that people should come "in contact..."
That should be: that people should NOT come "in contact..."
Proofreading. I need to do it more.
Posted by: CJ | August 5, 2008 2:01 PM
But I think the Mormons might win the prize for religious hypocrisy. The people that barely gave up polygamy not so long ago because of U.S. laws is waging a fierce campaign to get its members in California to vote for marriage to be "defined" as between one man and one woman only. Wow. Their anti-gay feelings run so deep they are willing to look like total nose-less fools. They righteously call it a "moral issue" with a straight face (haha no pun intended)! Even the most fiercest of anti-gay activists took a doubletake (what the f...?) and you could hear the media-version of crickets for a day or so. Hahaha!
Posted by: Peter Mc | August 5, 2008 2:01 PM
Why is anyone surprised? Christians have a long tradition of burning people they disagree with.
Posted by: Pete Rooke | August 5, 2008 2:04 PM
Those up in arms about this should ask themselves which is worse: to mark a cross onto a willing student's arm, or to drive a nail through a stolen Eucharist in an act of deliberate desercration and then documenting the crime to maximise the offence and outrage caused (whilst simultaneously decrying the level of offence and outrage your action had caused).
Both acts are reprehensible particularly because those involved are so called "educators" who have the minds of our children at their disposal.
____________________________________________________________
Dies Irae, Ben Stein, Dawkins
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp, KoT | August 5, 2008 2:07 PM
And apparently people they agree with .
Posted by: SeanD. | August 5, 2008 2:08 PM
Posted by: Pete Rooke | August 5, 2008 2:04 PM
Tard...
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp, KoT | August 5, 2008 2:09 PM
Easy. Physically harming someone is worse.
There you go!
Posted by: Bureaucratus Minimis | August 5, 2008 2:09 PM
It's only perjury if done in court right?
Generally yes, although there are some other notable circumstances, ie lying when presenting sworn testimony before Congress.
Freshwater is testifying before a school board, so it probably doesn't count as perjury (IANAL, and have no familiarity with Ohio law).
He may win this round, and keep his job for the moment. Seems that he could well be charged with assaulting students, and could also be sued by the parents. The real question is whether, given his popularity in the community, the local prosecutors would take the political risk of bringing such charges, and whether the parents would risk ostracization and retaliation by bringing a civil suit.
The feds are in a better position to charge him, since they aren't as subject to local political pressure, and the jury would be drawn from a much wider area than just the county where he works. Will be interesting to see what, if anything, USDOJ does with this.
Posted by: CJ | August 5, 2008 2:10 PM
LOL! That was a good one, Peter Mc!
Posted by: bastion | August 5, 2008 2:13 PM
When I went to Catholic school, the nuns lied to us all the time, and I knew it. Which didn't do anything to improve my respect for them.
Example: When I was in the second grade or third grade, the nun who taught my class told us that if we pretended that our finger was a gun by pointing our index finger at someone, when we "shot" our finger gun, God would make our finger explode.
As someone who adored the TV cowboy shows, regularly played cowboy, and often shot imaginary bad guys or my younger sister (to whom I always assigned the bad guy role) with my finger (often while riding my imaginary horse), I knew from vast personal experience that the nun was either lying, or "teaching" us about something she knew nothing herself about.
The nuns kept presenting me with those same two options throughout my Catholic school career.
Posted by: Delmania | August 5, 2008 2:14 PM
Another aspect that I don't think anyone has mentioned here is so-called Christian Persecution Complex. I am sure that anyone who has had exposure to Christian fundamentalists for a long period of time will see how many of them love to invent inane stories about how the World and/or demons are out "to get them" for being Christians. After, Jesus Himself predicted it would happen. However, as with many of His teachings, these people have taken it and twisted it to serve their own ends.
I am positive that Freshwater and his supporters will see the investigation and (hopeful) termination as more evidence that the "World is trying silence Christianity", which is ironic because I am positive Jesus would have an issue with this guy physically harming his student.
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | August 5, 2008 2:15 PM
... the lawyers for the prosecution...
Kitzmiller was a civil (not criminal) case. Those were lawyers for the plaintiffs, not prosecutors.
Posted by: Bronze Dog | August 5, 2008 2:16 PM
I'm having some old foamy thoughts again.
Posted by: Michelle | August 5, 2008 2:18 PM
Oh goddamnit, Pete's back?
Pete, let's sit back and look over this bad logic of yours.
Cracker... Not alive. Willing? Nah, a cracker has will.
Kid... Alive. Willing? No. The kid was probably not willing, and I doubt the teacher said "Here, lemme burn a CROSS on your arm.". Even if the kid WAS willing, HE BURNED THE ARM OF A FUCKING MINOR.
So let's ponder this through.
Is it bad to stab wheat? No. Who cares what you do to wheat. Is it bad to burn a student, EVEN WILLING, whom is a minor, with a religious mark?
FUCK YES. Jesus christ!
Posted by: raven | August 5, 2008 2:18 PM
Perjury is lying under oath. It doesn't have to be in a courtroom. Just as often, it is lying under oath while being deposed. Deposition usually isn't done in a courtroom.
Freshwater has changed his story way too many times. An obvious sign of lying and any half competent lawyer would point this out.
Hard to read too much into the packing of the school board meeting. Freshwater is a member of a christofascist church of demented haters and liars. I'm sure most of them showed up. What is the point of belonging to a cult if you aren't doing something stupid and evil? Might as well join the Episcopalians or Unitarians otherwise.
Posted by: Michelle | August 5, 2008 2:19 PM
(Of course I meant that the cracker has no will. Goddamnit, Jesus! Did you see what you retard made me write? Get out of my head!)
Posted by: CJ | August 5, 2008 2:21 PM
RE. "persecution complex": Actually that's part of criminal psych 101: best defense is a good offense, but generally indicates guilt. Funny, but the main character on "Without a Trace" just stated that very thing to a child molester that threatened to sue police for "harassment/libel of an innocent man."
Posted by: Sili | August 5, 2008 2:24 PM
Superior.Posted by: Rey Fox | August 5, 2008 2:30 PM
Pete, you are an utterly despicable human being. Go brand yourself.
Posted by: bastion | August 5, 2008 2:31 PM
At #62, Pete Rooke wrote:
Those up in arms about this should ask themselves which is worse: to mark a cross onto a willing student's arm, or to drive a nail through a stolen Eucharist in an act of deliberate desercration and then documenting the crime to maximise the offence and outrage caused (whilst simultaneously decrying the level of offence and outrage your action had caused).
[Boggle!] You truly live in a perverse world if you believe that burning the arm of a child is equivalent to putting a nail through a piece of bread and throwing it in the trash.
Burning the arm of a child caused that child real pain and perhaps permanent scarring. Putting a nail through the host did not cause pain to the host. And while the host probably has a permanent hole, at least until it decays, for gosh sakes, holes in bread aren't anything to get worked up over.
And, unlike Freshwater, P.Z. owned up to what he'd done and even provided a photo to document his deed. Proving once again that an atheist is more moral than many a God believer.
Posted by: Pete Rooke | August 5, 2008 2:31 PM
@ Michelle
In amongst that profane filled rant laced with numerous ellipsis, various errors of capitalization, and a prima facia example of "begging the question" I managed to discern why we have, as of now, been talking across purposes; you seem to view the Eucharist as little more the ingredients it is made from and in doing so you deny both its symbolic value as well as the process of transubstantiation that Catholics believe takes place. This is surely an error on your part.
____________________________________________________________
Dies Irae, Ben Stein, Dawkins
Posted by: Tophe | August 5, 2008 2:31 PM
Audio of the Lying for Jebus Freshwater here.
Posted by: Randy | August 5, 2008 2:32 PM
Didn't SkyDaddy® issue some sort of commandment about that?
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | August 5, 2008 2:33 PM
raven @ # 21: ... Freshwater. Just another christofascist moron with the morality of a slime mold.
This is unfair, even slanderous.
Individually or collectively, slime mold behavior is very reasonable and unobjectionable, and quite creative by microbial standards.
Posted by: tsg | August 5, 2008 2:33 PM
You're an idiot. Physically harming a child whose care you've been entrusted with is in no way, shape or form, comparable to throwing away a freaking cracker. Get some perspective or shut the fuck up.
Posted by: Ichthyic | August 5, 2008 2:33 PM
This is surely an error on your part.
projection becomes you, Pete.
Posted by: the strangest brew | August 5, 2008 2:35 PM
Every fundamental Christian must lie to preserve their rose tinted world view...
In fact they look to each other to reinforce their lying because that is the accepted norm in their cult..you have to twist the truth for the greater glory of god and jebus especially.
Because if you don't other delusions (religions)... or god forbid... atheists... will inherit the Earth.
They are scared of atheists because they really do not understand why atheists do not 'praise de lawd'..they can not comprehend...'those atheists must be sick, or perverts certainly devoid of morals for sure or probably scientists', cos that is what they are told by their erstwhile leaders in delusion, and they believe them.
The only way they can process Atheism is that it must be a religion...they can handle that pigeon hole...frame of reference you see.
So they cannot tell the truth to each other let alone the rest of society.
They dare not, if they did tell truth where would it all end. Ostracised by the rest of their barking cultists for one thing.
Shunned for rationality scores no brownie points simply because fear of exclusion overrides all other considerations.
Most communities are theist based...especially in the US...that is what they do, they think it adds gravitas to their ego...in business...education...even health, that act is bolstered approved of even encouraged by authority whether ostensibly secular or theist, not being a god botherer is an alien concept, it would hurt their standing in a society which they love being the pillar of.
Besides everyone else does the same.
<They think it is what is expected of them, tis the minority that actually believe the crap they spiel, those are the real deluded and the psychotically crazy ones...Jim Jones and later the Waco debacle springs to mind (are these lessons never learnt), as opposed to the rest that just nod their heads in agreement cos not nodding the bonce means they are not of that community. Simple like so...it is all based on fear and cowardice, lying is just a natural extension of these traits and none do it better then jebus lovers!
That is why you have the Jim Joneses and the David Koreshes...everyone is to in awe and to frightened to say 'hold on a second that ain't right...'
The real wowser is that the gestapo that inevitably surround these paragons of enlightenment are themselves quite barking only more so...a look at the bishops surrounding the Archbishop of Canterbury or the Cardinals that ride shotgun for Benny baby are fine examples of the genre!
More down market we are inflicted with the Dr Dino's ,the Gishes, Behe's, and McKay's et al!
Same thing really all surrounded by their own private wing of low iQ'd but high fervoured secret police, but done in a lower key so as not to spook the horses!
The real sad thing is even now that nonsense is going on as we type and blog...so...