I think this quote so completely encapsulates their stance. What's that rule about how you can't tell the difference between a parody and the real thing when it's soooo fudged up?“To think that somehow the rules of evidence can lead you to the right
answer is just not right,” said Jordan W. Lorence, a lawyer with Alliance Defense Fund and a member of the trial team for the people and groups who intervened to defend the ban after state officials would not.
Classic. Simply classic.
How could we possibly think that "evidence" could lead us to the right answer? Us silly, sad critical thinkers.
The great thing is that Jordan's statement is at least self-consistent. How does he know he is right you ask? Well, we know he doesn't need any evidence to assert his statement is correct.http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/us/23bar.html