THE NEWS IS BIGGER THAN DATELINE, BBC, CBC, ETC. (page 105)

AuldSoul

Oroborus,

That sounds like a great approach. Thanks for getting a second opinion.

Respectfully,
AuldSoul

skeeter1

Muchos cudos to Barbara Give that lady a beer!

skeeter1

For all those who want to discredit the Journal of Church and State, part of the JW Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies, take this!:

***************************************************************************************************************************************************************

The work of the J. M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies is assisted by a panel of highly distinguished scholars, jurists, and educators with demonstrated expertise in the field of church-state relations. These advisors are valuable assets to the Institute and make meaningful contributions through their counsel, suggestions, ideas, and scholarly writings. The members are:

Henry J. Abraham
University of Virginia William J. Byron, S. J.
Holy Trinity Rectory

Robert F. Drinan, S.J.
Georgetown University Law Center

W. Cole Durham, Jr.
J. Rueben Clark Law School
Brigham Young University

Ronald B. Flowers
Texas Christian University

Edward M. Gaffney, Jr.
Valparaiso University School of Law

Edwin S. Gaustad
University of Calif. at Riverside, Emeritus

Robin Johansen
Remcho, Johansen & Purcell

William A. Kaplin
The Catholic University of America

Franklin H. Littell
Temple University, Emeritus

Benito Lopez, Jr.
Association of Catholic
Colleges and Universities

Kent Greenawalt
Columbia University School of Law

Michael B. Greenbaum
Jewish Theological Seminary of America

A. E. Dick Howard
University of Virginia School of Law

Philip R. Moots
Moots, Cope & Weinberger, Co.,

Robert M. O'Neil
University of Virginia Norman Redlich
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz

Kathleen C. Santora
Georgetown University

Sheldon E. Steinbach
American Council on Education

Sharon Worthing Vaino
Attorney-at-Law, New York City

Charles M. Whelan, S.J.
Fordham University School of Law

Baylor University established the J. M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies in 1957, so named in honor of an outstanding alumnus, an ardent advocate of religious liberty, and a distinguished author of publications on church and state. The Institute is the oldest and most well established facility of its kind located in a university setting. It is exclusively devoted to research in the broad field of church and state and the advancement of religious liberty around the world.

Recognition of the work of the Institute has come from a variety of sources through the years, including the Max Nathan Memorial Library Award for the Institute's contributions to human relations, the Religious Liberty Award from the First World Congress on Religious Liberty (Rome), the "Premio Arturo Carlo Jemolo," a prestigious award conferred by a well known scholarly society in Turin, Italy, and important awards from the Council on Religious Freedom (U.S.) and the American Jewish Congress.

In addition to gifts from individual donors, including a substantial contribution from Ethel and Simon Bunn for an endowed chair in church-state studies, grants to the Institute in support of its programs have been made by various organizations and foundations, including the Council on Religious Freedom, the Scottish Rite Foundation of Freemasonry, the American Jewish Committee of the Southwest, the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, the M. C. and Mattie Caston Foundation, the Baptist General Convention of Texas, the Lilly Endowment, and The Pew Charitable Trusts.

The teaching and research faculty of the Church-State Institute, displayed from left to right in photo: Dr. Charles McDaniel, Dr. Barry Hankins, Dr. Derek Davis (Director), Dr. Francis J. Beckwith (Associate Director), Dr. Marc H. Ellis.

The Carroll Library Building was constructed in 1902. It
houses the library and offices of the Church-State Institute,
as well as the Texas Collection and the Institute of Oral History.

AuldSoul

Yeah! You tell 'em, skeeter!!! Whar's mah beer?

Seriously, the main point of this essay should be easy to understand. "Religious belief" is not being addressed. Consideration of the tort of misrepresentation as narrowly focused redress for specific actions resulting in harm, i.e. specific "religious exercise" is all that is being requested. More specifically, the ACT of publishing misrepresented secular facts, the publication of which was not compelled by any belief—and even if that were claimed Molko provides established precedent for the court to rule on the side of state interest and strike the claim down without proof that publishing these facts were motivated by belief.

AuldSoul

seesthesky

someone said: "The journal this is published in is a legal equaivalent of peer-reviewed scientific literature. The journal is not a publication that specialises in unfounded speculation, but rather in articles addressing law that are held to be a fair representation of or commentary on law."

WRONG WRONG WRONG - the editors of law review jourals are, typically, law students - lol! - and the peer review amounts to published disagreements - law journal publication is nothing like the hard sciences - at least not in the U.S. - lol

skeeter1

Seethesky.....YOU are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG

I talked with the Journal of Church & State's editor last week.

The Journal of Church & State is NOT a student run journal. A student run journal is one where the editor and staff are law students who do the work. A student run's editorial staff changes every semester as students graduate. Student run journals do not have a peer review before publication.

The Journal of Church & State is run by law professors. Derek Davis (pictured in my above comment) is the editor-in-chief. He's NO student folks. The other editors are full time employees, not students.

When a paper initially arrives, Mr. Davis reads it. IF he likes it, he sends it to two other professors who are experts in the field. These two "peer reviewers" may or may not be in Texas. These other professors read the paper, make comments and suggestions, and forward the paper back to Mr. Davis...each giving his opinion on whether it should be published and give suggestions, discuss weaknesses, etc. Mr. Davis then gives the paper back to the author for revision, if accepted. The paper then goes back to Mr. Davis who determines if the new paper meets his liking. Then, the editorial staff go to town on the footnoting, editing, whatever else they do.

All of the Journal of Church & State's articles are peer-reviewed.

lol!

seesthesky

lol - "if he likes it" = peer review - lol - that is nothing like scientific peer review - and law is nothing like science - although law, historically, to gain social legitimacy, has incorporated into its lexicon words that sound "scientific" such as "theory" and methods of analysis that appear objective - but the truth is - the law usually evolves, not from fact to conclusion, but from desired result to supporting "theories" - indeed, that is the nature of u.s. law - lawyers take postions as advoctes for clients then figure out how to support them - because of this, any notion of "peer review" has little, if any, value insofar as such review, as in the hard sciences, serves to ensure accuracy - lol

skeeter1

Seethesky. Science is also theory too. Mr. Davis is more of an expert on religious theory and its trends than either you, I, or Mr. Esq. He saw the trend that Ms. L-W's article could take. So did the other two peer reviewers who had to give their "thumbs up."

THE NEWS IS BIGGER THAN DATELINE, BBC, CBC, ETC.

Share this