The Sun-Sentinel features this article (spotted via Critical Miami), in which the author of the Sun-Sentinel article apparently ”doesn’t get” why evolution is taught in schools but “intelligent design” is not. 

The author does have some good points.  In some ways, a belief in evolution requires its own dogma.  Many people who believe in evolution can be as overzealous as religious fanatics.  She does have a point that evolution (which apparently may be renamed to “biological changes over time”) is taught as if it is the absolute truth, and “intelligent design” (religion) is not taught at all.  However, the author seems to ignore that one of the fundamental principles upon which this country was founded was the idea that religion and government should not be commingled, and separation of church and state is exactly why we don’t teach “intelligent design” in schools.

Why must it be called “intelligent design”?  My hunch is that it is an attempt to make religion sound more like science, and therefore to make it more acceptable to teach in schools.  I drive by the Church of Christ, Scientist every day on my way to work and wonder if members of this congregation spearheaded the “intelligent design” movement.  And here’s a personal anecdote (and the “blawg” part), which proves my point that “intelligent design” = unabashed religion.  One day I’m picking a jury in a criminal case.  The judge has all members of the jury panel fill out questionnaires that ask about the basic details of their lives including where they live, what their careers are, their hobbies, etc.  I misread one man’s answers due to handwriting that only leads me to believe that he should have become a doctor.  Rather than reading “graphic design” as his career, I misread his career as “organic design”.  I was quite intrigued by this and decided to question him further.  When I asked him what he does as part of his career in “organic design”, he corrected me and told me that he does graphic design.  Then he followed up with, “Organic design?  Isn’t that God?”  The entire jury panel errupted in laughter.  Case closed.

I’m impressed to think that there are parents out there who care about what their kids are doing at school.  It’s unfortunate that the author has to “de-program” her kids as a result of what is being taught, but that’s exactly why people can feel free to send their kids to private schools or to home school their children.  When parents don’t like what schools are teaching and they want to teach their own theories, that’s fine.  But the fact that they choose not to home school or send their kids to private school, doesn’t mean that the rest of us should have to teach their theories in school or to water down our curriculum with things that don’t belong there, such as religion. 

Now if you want to be technical the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights doesn’t say that religion has to be separated from school or even that “church” has to be separated from “state”:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….”

Through various court interpretations, the First Amendment to the Bill of Rights has come to mean that religion cannot be forced upon students in public schools.  One of my middle school English teachers had the right outlook on this and had a poster that said, “As long as there are tests, there will be prayer in schools.”  Although religion is not taught in schools, students will continue to believe in it and even practice it, right in the classroom. 

Boo on the Sun-Sentinel for posting an article that seems to ignore our Constitution and even seems to suggest that we should allow the erosion of our Constitutional rights.  Ok, maybe I’m being over dramatic, but you know, you give them an inch, they take the whole yard, etc.  Double boo for publishing authors who seem clueless about our rights.  (That’s what blogs are for: where clueless authors can post whatever they want.  Lol.)  Yay, I guess, to the Sun-Sentinel for pushing freedom of speech and freedom of the press?  And double yay for a parent who cares what her kids are doing in school.

And now I’m really off on a tangent, but I do want to say that my favorite battle between evolution and religion is among the car fish.  First of all, whoever came up with the Darwin car fish in response to the Christian car fish must have been a genius.  (Check out this article for neat ideas other people had for car fish.)  Second, I want to address the Christian fanatics who in response to the Darwin fish now carry on their cars a large “Truth fish” eating the smaller Darwin fish.

Doesn’t this car emblem reflect a dogmatic lack of thought?  Doesn’t this emblem reflect a belief at least in natural selection, the mechanism of evolution?  If you put this fish on your car, you are admitting that at least part of the theory of evolution is correct in that the bigger, stronger, more well-adapted organisms eat the weaker, smaller, less-adapted organisms.  By putting this fish on your car, didn’t you mean to show that evolution is not true?  Again, this is where a dogmatic lack of thought can lead you.  You could be one of those morons, who goes around blindly sticking fish emblems on your car, planning to show the world that evolution doesn’t happen and that Christianity AKA “intelligent design” AKA “Truth” is the winner.  Too bad that you accidentally confirmed a belief in part of the very theory you were intending to disprove.  And what were you thinking anyway when you thought that you were going to disprove a theory when you stuck a plastic fish to your car?  But I digress….

In Broward we’ve recently had a few cases about masturbating in jail, and while I thought those cases were embarrassing enough for defendants, they don’t seem nearly as embarrassing as this case.  The South Dakota Supreme Court overturned a conviction for indecent exposure where a 19 year old attempted to have sex with a mannequin behind closed doors.  The Court ruled that because the boy turned off the lights, shut the door, and moved behind a desk, his actions did not constitute indecent exposure.  Poor guy said at the time that he hadn’t seen his girlfriend in a year.  And now the story’s on CNN.  It almost sounds like something from the American Pie movies, only more embarrassing.

A few years ago I was a student taking Constitutional Law with University of Miami Professor D. Marvin Jones.  I was one of three white students in a room of about 50 students.  There were class presentations by small groups of students, although nearly all of these groups were made up entirely of African American students.  One such group did a presentation on how terrible the FCAT is.  I must admit that I agree with them that the FCAT is terrible, however, I was deeply offended by some of their comments and the actions of Professor Jones. 

One of the students in the group making the presentation loudly proclaimed early on, “The FCAT is the white man’s plan to keep the black man down.”  Most of the classroom errupted in cheers and clapping, which was loudly punctuated by Professor Jones’ clapping and ear-to-ear smile.  I was deeply offended, and I’m sure other students were offended as well, as evidenced by the line I had to wait in to speak to the dean after class.  I could not believe that Professor Jones, someone who publicly pretends to fight for racial equality, would allow such racist comments, and even applaud them, behind the closed doors of his classroom.  To me, the student’s comment indicated that there is some kind of conspiracy among all white people to keep black people down.  I felt as if the girl was implying that simply because I am white that I am part of that conspiracy.  Now, I’m as much a fan of conspiracy theories as the next person, and there very well might be a conspiracy to keep minority groups powerless and at a lower socioeconomic status than the majority, however, I believe in seeking equality.  I don’t appreciate that this student lumped all white people into one category.

At the end of the presentation a white student raised his hand and said he would like to make a comment.  Instantly Professor Jones was on the offensive and began yelling at the student that there were no experts in this class.  I didn’t think you could get any more left-wing than Professor Jones, and because of that I was shocked that he would try to stifle free speech in a law school classroom.  After all, he didn’t censor any of the group presentations, despite what might have been the expression of inappropriate views.  Jones seems to only be in favor of free speech for himself and others he considers to be like him, either politically or racially.  I think his behavior shows that his views are that way regarding racial equality.  I would hate to imagine what would have happened if the three white students formed a group and made a presentation where they made a general statement about the intent of all blacks, similar to the coment actually made in class regarding the intent of all whites.

Despite Jones’ attempt to stop him, the student persisted in trying to make a comment, so Professor Jones yelled at him to leave the class.  Jones followed the kid outside, and we could hear screaming on the part of Jones.  The student, now bright red, returned to the class silently a few minutes later.  Then Jones gruffly asked what the student wanted to say.  The student’s comment was a minor correction to the presentation regarding when it is that the students are first subjected to the FCAT.

I went to two deans to complain that this professor was racist against white students.  The deans dismissed my allegations quickly.  Even when I pointed out that the professor rarely showed up for class on time, they seemed unconcerned about his behavior.  One of the deans told me that they had a similar problem where he simply stopped teaching when he was running for a political office, and they’d speak to him about teaching class and being on time again.  That was when I realized that UM was not going to do anything about this rogue professor.

I write about this experience because it left a lasting impression on me.  This was my first real experience facing racial discrimination.  I could never put my finger on it when I was called on all semester and the other two white students were constantly called upon, while black students were not required to participate in class.  When I spoke to the deans, they suggested that Jones was just calling on all of the white students constantly because the white students were interested and contributed to interesting class discussions.  However, on the day of the FCAT presentation, I suddenly saw everything for what it was.  I think everyone can agree that Jones doesn’t outright hate whites, he just holds blacks as superior to whites.  As I thought back to all of the times that Jones had lectured that separate is not equal, I realized that Jones had separate policies for black students and white students.  If white students had made a general statement about the intent of blacks, I think it’s safe to say Jones wouldn’t have been clapping or smiling.  Perhaps I was oversensitive at the time, but I was horrified to have to report such a thing to the deans.  I was disappointed that the professor could not be neutral in teaching the class, and I was disappointed that UM knew of some of the problems regarding this individual and yet did not weed this individual out, or at least impose sanctions to try to correct the behavior.

Today I learned of this article (via Above the Law) detailing how Professor D. Marvin Jones was arrested on the charge of soliciting an undercover police officer for sex.  The best part of this was where I read that he was offering $20 as he approached in his Mercedes sports car.  I can’t wait to see the defense on this one.  I will say that I firmly believe in our Constitution, and I firmly believe in the presumption of innocence.  However, as a criminal defense lawyer, I do know that cases involving undercover law enforcement agents are more difficult to defend than cases not involving law enforcment.  Honestly, I don’t believe that soliciting prostitution is the most terrible crime, but I think it’s inappropriate, if Professor Jones is found guilty, for the deans to just ignore such a finding of guilt.  If Professor Jones is found guilty, I hold out hope that the deans at UM will do something besides just rubber stamp Jones’ outrageous and unacceptable behvior.  When I spoke to the deans regarding the incident that happened in my class, I got the impression that they did not want to take action against Jones, despite admitted problems regarding his behavior, because he was one of the few African American professors at UM.  All I can say is that when I read the article, I thought the results were karma at work, and I don’t think Jones can hide behind issues of race forever.

What’s wrong with this picture?  The Sun Sentinel reports that Steve Potgieter “almost had a heart attack” when he learned that his juvenile step-daughter was being represented by Bryan Docobo, an intern at the Broward County Public Defender’s Office, who pled to the charge of contributing to the delinquency of a minor after he had sex with a 15 year old girl when he was 23.  The article also reports that Mr. Potgieter and his wife are assisting in the prosecution of his juvenile step-daughter because she broke into his car, stole his credit cards, and withdrew money from his bank account.  According to the article, “Potgieter said he and his wife, Dana, are uneasy having someone with this history working so closely with troubled teens like their daughter.”

I think the moral of this story is that instead of doing background checks on his step-daughter’s representatives in court, maybe he should be focusing on what he can do as a parent to ensure that his daughter does not find herself as a defendant in the justice system.  I am never one to tell people victimized by crimes not to prosecute.  Clearly, this man thought he and his wife needed the assistance of the Court to discipline his step-daughter.  But if he is so concerned with what’s going on in juvenile court, and so outraged by the way his step-daughter is being represented, then maybe he should have taken action at home.  Then again, maybe he did take action at home, and maybe the justice system was a last resort.  And finally, what was Help Me Howard thinking by assigning this intern to juvenile court? 

After trying several cases before the Honorable Judge Jeffrey Levenson, I’ve learned a few things to expect.  Judge Levenson wants you to stand at the podium without too much walking around, he wants you to call your client by his or her last name, and he wants you to yield gracefully to the Court’s rulings.  However, I never expected that Judge Levenson would give a criminal defendant the shoes off his feet. 

In a recent news article, it was reported that Michael Fernandez, on trial for trafficking in cocaine, was brought from jail in his uniform and without clothes for trial.  Some time later his clothes arrived, but his shoes did not.  He was wearing flip flops provided by the jail.  When it came time for Fernandez to testify, Judge Levinson took off his size 11 loafers and gave them to the defendant, so that he could wear them to walk to the witness stand without the jury knowing he was in jail. 

I must say, after reading the article, I was very impressed.  It appears that Judge Levenson was very careful not to share the defendant’s custody status with the jury in order to assure that the defendant’s case was judged only on the evidence.  We need more judges like this that are willing to do what it takes to make sure defendants get fair trials.  Go Judge Levenson!