(April 5, 2009 at 9:54 am)Demonaura Wrote: The jury chose to use their position to express their dissent, they used their power in a way clearly influenced by their own personal standards and not the standards of their position.
The judge ruled in the professors favor, the judge is worth nothing at all, a complete waste of your taxes if nobody is going to follow his ruling. That's why we have freaking judges, to make rulings for us.
The juries job was to find an appropriate ammount of compensation, not overrule the judge by using their power to remove the compensation the judge rules as warranted. Personally I'd try to find a law to charge the jury, or at least dump them, never select them for jury duty again and bring in a new jury to do their job properly.
On the other point, private institutions probably should be able to fire for any reason they want but, if they want to be recognised in america then they can't go around firing staff for having an opion that is unpopular. Hell then we'd all get fired for being atheists.
The judge exists to make rulings for the people, if he made a mistake don't go vigilante (also a crime) and undermine the system to force your view on others, use the proper channels and suggest to HIS boss that he is not fit to be a judge. The investigation will decide.
Sorry but the CNN quote is that the jury FOUND the prof. to have been wrongly terminated. Are you contradicting it?
A man is born to a virgin mother, lives, dies, comes alive again and then disappears into the clouds to become his Dad. How likely is that?
