The Sophistry of Darwinism

Kevin Drum of Washington Monthly doesn’t even pretend that his view on teaching Intelligent Design in public schools is inclusive:

I myself would not argue that Darwinism in biology classes is protected by the free exercise clause of the First Amendment. Rather, I would argue more narrowly that everything else is forbidden. I f a school district decides not to teach biology at all, that’s fine. But if they do teach it, they aren’t allowed to include religious proselytizing in the curriculum.

The distinction here is this: creationism is Christian proselytizing, a no-no for government bureaucrats. Intelligent Design is so clearly a thinly veiled version of creationism that it’s forbidden too. Darwinism, however, is simply science. School districts are free to stop teaching science if they want, but if they do teach it, they have to teach Darwinism just as much as they have to teach Newtonian mechanics, Boyle’s law, and the theory of relativity.

Ignoring for this post the fact that Drum either doesn’t understand the difference between Darwinism and real science or he pretends not to, he’s stated as clearly as I’ve seen the bogus argument put forward by the humanist zealots who want to ban God from the public square.

It is this: Teaching that there is no God, or that He’s a liar, is not the same thing as leaving religion outside the classroom. It’s humanist proselytizing.

Drum would have you believe otherwise because it’s the only way Darwinists can win their case. Taken on its merits, Darwinism fails to explain the origins of the species. It serves one purpose only, and that is to deny the existence of an omnipotent Creator.

More evidence of this came to light the day the tsunami hit South Asia when a renowned expert in fossil human anatomy announced the results of the first-ever study of the 200 or so (only 200? Hmm…) alleged pre-human skeletons and declared that all of them, from Australopithecus onward, were misidentified homo sapiens–modern humans.

What does this mean? No missing links. Not a single one. But even then, the professor could not keep himself from declaring that the skeletons “show clear evidence of evolution.”

You know what secularists call someone with a blind, unshakeable faith in something he can’t possibly prove? A religious fanatic.

Which is exactly what militant Darwinists are.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


UA-2941127-3