The incredible cascade of creationism continues. Today we have yet another blog item from David Klinghoffer, who holds the exalted title of “senior fellow” (i.e., flaming, full-blown creationist), bestowed upon him by the neo-theocrats at the Discovery Institute‘s creationist public relations and lobbying operation, the Center for Science and Culture (a/k/a the Discoveroids, a/k/a the cdesign proponentsists).
You can’t begin to appreciate Klinghoffer’s title without knowing something about Dominionism and Dominion Theology. That movement is mentioned in the Wikipedia article on Howard Ahmanson, Jr., known to be a generous patron of the Discoveroids, but they don’t flat-out say that Ahmanson is a Dominionist. But it’s close. Ah, this article makes the connection. We don’t know Mr. Ahmanson, so make of it what you will.
Now that you’re up to speed, you’re ready for some excerpts from Klinghoffer’s little essay on what he calls “Dominionist” Darwinism. Here we go, with bold font added by us, and links deleted:
Our friend and colleague Nancy Pearcey has a good piece in Human Events taking off from a New Yorker attack piece on Michele Bachmann who, for reading and admiring Nancy’s book Total Truth, is smeared as a Christian “dominionist.” The word is a made-up term, hitherto unfamiliar to Pearcey or to me.
Klinghoffer never heard of the word “Dominionist” before. You believe him, don’t you, dear reader? Of course you do. He continues:
It’s intended to cast an innocent idea championed by Pearcey — that Christianity (or one might add, Judaism) describes a holistic worldview rather than just a “religion” — into a sinister light conjuring fears of theocratic plots.
Jeepers — sinister theocratic plots! Who in his right mind would ever associate such an idea with the Discoveroids? That’s absurd, right?
Haven’t we seen this tactic before? Sure we have. It was way back, more than three years ago, when we posted Discovery Institute — Deny, Deny, Deny! There we first described a tactic the Discoveroids used to deny the very common observation that Intelligent Design proponents are really creationists in disguise. We said it was:
[T]heir tactic of openly declaring the full truth of their motivations, but thinly disguising it as an absurdity that only their misguided adversaries believe. Yes — how ridiculous that the Discoveroids might actually be promoting an anti-science agenda!
There were subsequent occasions when they used that tactic, and when we posted about it. See The Wedge Document, So What?, and also Klinghoffer: “What, me worry?”, and also Klinghoffer: “You Caught Us. So What?”, and there were a few others, but that’ll give you the general idea. They use that tactic all the time.
Okay, back to Klinghoffer. Pay attention now. If he’s true to the “Deny, Deny, Deny!” tactic, he won’t refute the dominionist charge. Oh no, he’ll just deny it by claiming it’s absurd, and he’ll start insulting his critics. Watch how it’s done:
Yet even discarding the scare-word aspect of the term, couldn’t we say the same of many other ideas in wide circulation in our culture? As Nancy points out, for example, in the minds of many Darwinists, a theory that took root in the fields of biology and history has all-encompassing implications, far beyond the narrow realm of explaining the mechanism by which life evolves: ….
We’ve omitted the quote from Klinghoffer’s friend Nancy, claiming that “Darwinism” is an all-encompassing world view that includes politics, sexuality, music, and literature. Yes, that guy Darwin did it all, which is why (according to Klinghoffer) the “Darwinists” are Dominionists. It must be true because his friend Nancy says so. Therefore, pay no attention to anyone’s assertion that the Discoveroids are Dominionists.
Wasn’t that sweet? Klinghoffer concludes with this:
If Pearcey and Bachmann’s Christianity is “dominionist,” no less so, for many evolutionists, is Darwinism.
So there you are. The Discoveroids aren’t Dominionists — you are! Nyaaa, nyaaaa, nyaaaah!
Copyright © 2011. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.