Creationist Wisdom #201: Evolution Is Slavery

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Coloradoan of Fort Collins, Colorado. It’s titled We have let ourselves become slaves of state.

Great title, huh? We’ll give you a few excerpts, enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary, and as we usually do we’ll omit the writer’s name and city. Here we go, with a bit of bold font added for emphasis.

“We hold these truths self-evident, that all men are created … by their Creator … with inalienable (God-given) rights …” – Primary founding statement in the United States Declaration of Independence.

You know we’re off to a good start when the letter-writer begins by quote-mining Jefferson’s elegant prose about “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” But that’s just the beginning. It gets better:

Can we explain how a nation founded on such a statement can exclude the creation and God from its education, its science and its government actions?

Your Curmudgeon can explain it. The Declaration isn’t the law. State education is required to be secular by virtually all state constitutions, and the federal government is prohibited by the First Amendment from establishing religion. That’s not too complicated, is it? As for excluding the letter-writer’s “creation and God” from science — that’s just too easy. Let’s read on:

Thirty-five years ago, it was proven, included in scientific journals, and never refuted, that all granite in our planet contains an effect called “Polonium Halos” by its discoverer, Dr. Robert Gentry, which could only exist under two conditions, that the granite (and thus the Earth) was created instantaneously, cold. That’s right, no heat, no millions of years, instantaneously and at room temperature. Education, science and government judges ignore it and declare God banished from their circles.

Lordy, lordy — polonium halos. We haven’t run into that one for quite some time. It has long been listed and debunked at the TalkOrigins website: Index to Creationist Claims. See Claim CF201: Polonium haloes indicate a young earth. We continue with the letter:

Dr. Michael Behe, one of the, if not the foremost, microbiologists, along with many others, have proved that even the most elementary living cells have micro machines of vast ability and irreducible complexity of many parts, a fact that even Darwin said would make his theory of evolution null and void. Yet evolution is still foisted as the truth, and science, education and government ignore these facts and more, much much more.

We won’t waste your time on that clunker. It too is debunked at the TalkOrigins website. See Claim CB200: Some systems are irreducibly complex. Here’s more from today’s letter:

Why is this in a nation that says it was created by God in its foundation? Simple, for both macro and micro science to deny God makes man, and specifically the men in charge, gods in their own minds and the rest of us without God-given rights, slaves to the State and surfs to these self-proclaimed and in-control kings and princes of America.

Aaaargh!! God is being denied by both “macro and micro science” to make gods of politicians and to make us their slaves. What can we say to that? It’s true that the government has grown way too large and meddlesome, but somehow we doubt that state-mandated creationism is the solution. Moving along:

All over our capital city, all over the writings of our founders, the establishing of a Christian worldview nation with Christian and biblical education as a mandatory part of our education system

Yeah, yeah — the Founders intended this country to be one big happy Sunday school. Sure. See Is America a “Christian Nation”?

Now we’ll jump to the end of the letter, and this is where it gets really creepy. Oh, the open bracket is in the original, so we left it as it appears:

“If government becomes destructive of these rights, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it [those responsible…” – Third part of that foundational statement of the Declaration of Independence.

Does the letter-writer mean to encourage a holy war against evolution? Click over to the Coloradoan, read the entire letter, and reach your own conclusion.

Copyright © 2011. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

11 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #201: Evolution Is Slavery

  1. …the granite (and thus the Earth) was created instantaneously, cold. That’s right, no heat, no millions of years, instantaneously and at room temperature.

    What’s that molten stuff spewing out of volcanoes – chopped liver?

  2. Jeffrey Shallit

    Calling the quite-mediocre Behe one of the “foremost” microbiologists is yet another example of credential inflation.

  3. I had no idea I was a surf.

    Dude!

  4. The biggest guffaw in this piece was his reference to Behe as “one of the, if not the foremost, microbiologists,”. An professor disowned by his own university, no less, but in the writer’s mind, a great biologist.

  5. i’m astounded that the same tired arguments won’t die, but I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. when all you read is the work of the ICR and CSC, all you’ll get is recycled nonsense. let it fester in the shadows for a generation and then bring back out the same old crap again!

    and ‘slaves to the state’? I don’t remember the last time I felt my personal freedoms jeopardized by science or scientists. Maybe by the TSA who isn’t making me any safer when I fly, but certainly not by any evilutionists.

  6. @magpie: the molten stuff is the result of sin. It came about after the fall screwed up the instantaneously produced cool Earth, and caused the hell-fire to form! come on, you knew that!

  7. When Jefferson wrote that “all men are created equal”, he obviously did not mean that all humans have the same physical characteristics, and I rather doubt that he had in mind either human reproduction or the origins of the vertebrate eye.

    This argument is yet another example of an argument against evolution which works at least as well as an argument against reproduction and development.

  8. While it certainly IS the right of the people to alter or abolish, by force if necessary, any government which becomes destructive of their rights, it certainly is not a LEGAL right of the people to do that under the Constitution, which of course provides any number of peaceful, legal methods for altering/abolishing.

    Resorting to force is a natural right, or a human right if you prefer. But of course no government could acknowledge such a legal right and remain a government. Without the ability to force people to pay taxes and obey laws, there’s no government. And as long as our current system of government is considered legitimate by the vast majority of our people, anyone who resorts to force per the Declaration of Independence is not going to get very far.

  9. Gabriel Hanna says:

    While it certainly IS the right of the people to alter or abolish, by force if necessary, any government which becomes destructive of their rights, it certainly is not a LEGAL right of the people to do that under the Constitution

    One of the reasons I look back with fondness to the Articles of Confederation is the peaceful, orderly way the national government (such as it was) accepted the new Constitution’s ratification. The Confederation’s officials just packed up, went home, and let the new government take over. In a sense, we do that every election, but that transition was rather unprecedented.

  10. SC: The transition of government is very remarkable, most especially in it’s very ordinariness. I recall returning to the US after living in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for several years, and voting in an election a few months later in my neighborhood polling station. There were some pleasant older volunteers checking off names and handing out ballots to be punched. Everyone was friendly, even though they might be voting for opposing candidates, and the chatter in line was about anything but politics. I kept thinking – if these people only knew just how lucky they were. There was no drama at all, just regular folks casting their ballots, yet we were changing the government. I still marvel at it.

  11. “… with inalienable (God-given) rights …”
    He lost me right there. I don’t know if he meant his parenthesis as a definition of “inalienable”, or just as his self-serving extension of the meaning of the word. Either way, it’s a good example of the muddle that sort of thinking leads to.