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.