Gorgonzola states:
"Professor Waldo was able to get the Senate to remove the bill from its agenda before voting on it"
How perfectly typical that is of
secular humanist tactics: At all costs, they strive to avoid
open public debate. They do their
dirty work in the dark of night, when nobody's watching. This so-called
"Professor" Waldo (I see no evidence given to support the contention that he
was, in fact, an
academic) couldn't achieve his bizarre goal by lawful means, so he resorted to
chicanery.
He failed to persuade the elected representatives of the people of
Indiana (good
Christian people, as well I know) that his little "theory" about
pi had any validity whatsoever.
The will of the people was clear, and to a
secular humanist the will of the people is
anathema. The people are not fools. The bill was solidly grounded in accepted mathematical fact; see
the text of the bill, right here if you dare doubt me. Public debate in the state
Senate of
Indiana would have confirmed the value of the law, and would have made
"Professor" Waldo a laughingstock. If he was capable of defending his views in public, if he had
any confidence in his own position,
why did he strive to avoid public debate?! It's quite clear: His position was indefensible and he knew it.
Once again, the
radical leftist agenda of hate is furthered by dishonest means.