Talk:Segraves vs. State of California

Thanks for putting this one up! I read the decision, tho, and I couldn't find any legal analysis at all. all I found was a bunch of "Everybody's so nice here!" and then a bald decision against Segraves. Is that what you see? Are you left with any idea why the judge made the decision he made? Ungtss 08:39, 10 June 2006 (CDT)


 * Ha! It's funny you said that, because that's what I was thinking while I was reading about the case. The judge seemed to be in happy land in his summation. I guess the key to what you are after is in the second paragraph of the "Court's opinion" and the second para of "The findings" in the article. That is, 1. Has the free excercise of religion been violated? 2. Under the science framework and anti-dogmatism policy the judge feels "No," but the board of education needs to tell everyone involved to follow the policy in case some are not. You are more than welcome to add details to the article. After re-reading it I don't think I will add anything to it, despite the "singing bluebirds and sweet honey" effect that may come through. But please feel free to add or change whatever you like. Everything here is a work in progress if I understand it correctly. -- Tim --Klang 17:52, 10 June 2006 (CDT)


 * Thanks! I noticed the bit about the "anti-dogmatism" policy, but he never tells what what that policy is, or why it doesn't violate the Lemon test ... basically, I didn't see him doing anything we pay judges to do.  But he definitely made sure everybody knew he thought they were very nice people:).  Ungtss 18:14, 10 June 2006 (CDT)


 * Thanks for the addition Ungtss. I have just fixed a couple of typos. I should add that even though I think this case should be included in CreationWiki, I couldn't find much "meat" when I was researching it. I spent more time than I planned on putting it together, so probably won't delve into it any more. But maybe someone from the Segraves family, or someone else involved in the case, will come across it and fill in the parts we couldn't find. They were all very nice people, so I'm sure they would be glad to help us out. -- Tim --Klang 23:14, 11 June 2006 (CDT)


 * Ha:)! Ungtss 23:41, 11 June 2006 (CDT)