Sunday, June 12, 2005

Religion, Politics, Science and the State

According to Wired News, "the National Academies has unveiled a new section of its website dedicated to teachers' resources on evolution in an effort "to quell a growing movement to teach creationism in U.S. schools."

The site was designed "to confront advocates of intelligent design, which is not a science," according to National Academies spokesman Bill Kearney.

The site features academic papers supporting evolutionary theory and supplements for educators detailing how to teach evolution in the classroom.

I am well aware that evolution is a theory. However, unlike creationism, it is thoroughly supported (not proven) by observable, scientific phenomena. The evidence offered to support creationism is, well, the absence of evidence to the contrary. The assumption that we must treat it as equally possible is not science. That is not even sound logic.

There are many Christians who do not consider evolution and creationism to be mutually exclusive concepts. However, if we expect the government to teach that something larger than ourselves set into motion all that we see before us without creating a state sponsored religion, how do educrats decide which version to teach? In the absence of proof, what makes one brand of creationism more credible than another? Popular consensus? Legislative decree?

Allowing the state to interfere in something as intimate as personal philosophy is dangerous. Even if the majority of society believes it, even if those in positions of power claim to agree, we are not safe in that world either:
"One of the great myths of our time is that you can't legislate morality," [Texas Gov. Rick Perry] told the ministers, according to a transcript provided to The Associated Press by his campaign..."I say you can't NOT legislate morality."
Whose standard of morality are we to be held accountable? Yours? Mine? A TX politician's?

Here's an idea. Teach your child reason. Prepare him to think critically so that he may recognize frauds like Rod Parsley and fallacies like intelligent design. Give him the tools to rely on his own intellect so he may stand apart as an individual and not fall victim as a ward of the state subject to the whims of the masses. His freedom depends on it.

[forgot my manners]
Wired News hat tip: Terri
Big Myth hat tip: Debbie

No comments: