A Portfolio of Creationist Perversion

We’ve previously discussed this topic in a general way, for example: Creationism and Morality, and also Atheism, Science, and Darwin; but we realize that we’ve been writing those essays on the defensive — refuting creationists’ charges of “Darwinist” immorality.

It makes no sense for science advocates to be in that posture. It’s time we turned it around and provided some specific examples of the evils of creationism. Let’s start with a trip down memory lane:

Kristin Maguire: Porn Queen and creationist.

Mark Sanford, creationist buffoon.

Dale & Leilani Neumann, creationists and child killers.

Kent Hovind, creationist jailbird.

Louisiana state senator Ben Nevers: “This is strictly about teaching science in the classroom. It has nothing to do with religion.”

Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture (a/k/a the Discoveroids): “The misreporting of the evolution issue is one key reason for this site.”

There are also several creationist preachers who have fallen, one way or another. Merely mentioning a few of their names should be sufficient, without recounting their misdeeds: Ted Haggard, Jimmy Swaggart, and Jim Bakker are relatively recent and highly-publicized examples.

Are we being unfair in pointing out a few high-profile failures out of many otherwise worthy preachers? No, we’re being very fair, because we acknowledge that most clergymen seem to lead exemplary lives. However, if the creationists’ claims are true, there shouldn’t be any failures — certainly not among creationist denominations.

Conversely, were the creationists correct about the evils of what they call “Darwinism,” there should be an embarrassingly long list of prominent biologists who have been moral failures — but we’re not aware of any, at least none remotely comparable to the creationist clergymen.

So what do we make of this? Unlike the creationists, who thrive on inventing the most outrageous falsehoods about the evil consequences of science (see: Debating Creationists: The Big Lie), we won’t even suggest that creationism causes crime and perversion.

We can’t do that because we know there are many people who lead honorable lives, although they don’t know any science and believe the nonsensical claims of their creationist preachers. Therefore it’s clear that merely believing in things like Noah’s Ark won’t lead one to depravity. (The creationists won’t admit it, but not believing such things doesn’t lead to depravity either.)

However, considering people like Haggard, Swaggart, and Bakker, it’s a flat-out undeniable fact that preaching creationism doesn’t guarantee morality. In fact, we suggest it’s a sign of moral weakness. Why do we say that? It’s because no one can be a promoter of creationism unless: (1) he is incapable of distinguishing truth from falsehood; or (2) he is willing to lie. Thus we see that creationist leaders are, by definition, drawn from the ranks of the morally depraved. The consequences are those we observe.

Do we have any other examples linking creationism and depravity? They’re not hard to find — all one needs to do is to Google for “disgraced preachers.” We’re not interested in listing everything such a search would turn up. Not all of them are creationists, but they’re very well represented — amazingly so if we ignore the “choir boy” problem which is unrelated to creationism. We think our point has been made.

And now we’ll risk a prediction. How about Phillip Garrido, the religious nut-case who kidnapped that 11 year old girl and kept her as a slave for 18 years? Does anyone out there think he was influenced by reading Charles Darwin? If so, raise your hands. [Curmudgeon looks around, but sees no hands.] Right, there’s no “Darwinism” there. But it’s a 99% probability that he’s a creationist.

Copyright © 2009. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

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

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

11 responses to “A Portfolio of Creationist Perversion

  1. Actually, Kristin Maguire’s other career as a writer of erotica doesn’t particularly trouble me, at least in principle (though in practise, her work might be execrable, I don’t know).

    It’s her promotion of Creationist twaddle, particularly in the role of Chairman of a state Board of Education, which is (though now, thankfully, was) perverse, disgusting, amoral and obscene.

  2. “Slowly, button by button, the Darwinist opened her bodice…”

  3. Good post. I agree that it’s time that we go on the offensive against these lying, ignorant, child-corrupting buffoons.

  4. megalonyx wrote: “..Creationist twaddle..”

    Which is “mendatious intellectual pornography,” if I may borrow a phrase from John Kwok.

  5. waldteufel says: “I agree that it’s time that we go on the offensive …”

    Donno why this never occurred to me before. I plan to use this list in the future.

  6. Frank J, your post was delayed because you used a word on the no-no list. Nothing personal.

  7. Well maybe not so high profile – downunder we had a creationist kill an evolutionist with a kitchen knife (story http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22924256-12377,00.html).

    [Better link: Evolution vs creation row ends in stabbing]

    How many other innocent people have been “yorked”.

  8. The Curmudgeon, giving birth to a whole new literary genre, wrote:

    “Slowly, button by button, the Darwinist opened her bodice…”

    Egad, I hope this isn’t building towards the Big Bang…

  9. Curmudgeon wrote: “Frank J, your post was delayed because you used a word on the no-no list. Nothing personal.”

    No problem. I appreciate any cleaning up of my language. I don’t consider that “censorship.”

    But speaking of “censorship,” there’s another category where defenders of real science need to get off the defensive and go on offense. Anti-evolution activists and their trained parrots like to accuse us of “censorship” because we dare to say that they can’t peddle their pseudoscience in those few hours of public school science class, while they are free to peddle it everywhere else.

    Meanwhile, they never miss an opportunity to omit any inconvenient refutation from their books and web sites. They “expelled” theistic evolutionists from “Expelled.” Even when they refer to Michael Denton, it’s always to his ID-friendly 1985 book. His 1998 book, which corrects most of his prior misconceptions is never acknowledged until they are caught.

  10. “Meanwhile, they never miss an opportunity to omit any inconvenient refutation”

    Because they’re too busy plugging their ears and stomping their feet while screaming “LALALALALALALALA!!!”

    So, when we point out the moral failings of creationists, they retort with “no one’s perfect”– then they criticize us scientists because of a mistaken and outdated misapplication of evolution (in the form of social darwinism).

  11. LRA says: “So, when we point out the moral failings of creationists …”

    But those aren’t TRUE creationists!