In an earlier entry I linked to the a post by Alex Altschuler at the University of Chicago Law Faculty Blog concerning the Dover case. Altschuler made some good points, I think, but the commentary that followed his post was even more illuminatating — and discouraging. With well over 100 comments, it became a swamp of nastiness. I posted a few of my criticisms of the Kitzmiller opinion as well as some other thoughts about scientific methodology and got hammered as a “liar,” “dishonest,” a “creationist troll,” etc., and was called things like “dpoopderbeck.” I have to confess that once or twice I tried the “nasty” approach as well. Someone derided me for being stealthy about my Christian convictions — as if I try to hide them on this site. After a while, I gave up, and later on the thread degenerated further into utterly silly mock letters from school children and pastors to their school boards.
Now, in the abstract, “dpoopderbeck” actually could be kind of funny, almost as funny as when someone at Evangelical Outpost called me “dopderdoink.” But when you read through that thread, it breathes bile and hate. There are lots of people with varying perspectives on the Dover case who are making good and reasonable arguments, like the arguments some commenters here have made. But there is something wrong with our culture if a challenging comment on a legal decision from an eminent law professor at one of the top law schools in the world becomes a playground for bullies who think adding “poop” to someone’s name is a bon mot. It’s really discouraging.