Creationist Wisdom #220: The Democrat

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in The Leaf-Chronicle of Clarksville, Tennessee. The letter is titled It’s time we stopped promoting the nonsense of evolution theory. 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:

Let’s talk about evolution as presented by Darwin. The sooner we reach some level of agreement and quit teaching this nonsense as fact in our schools, the better. And, the sooner we’ll quit thinking of the black race as a step in the evolution process.

Ah yes, Darwin the racist. Well, we know where that idea comes from (see Discovery Institute: Darwin = Racism). What else does today’s letter-writer have for us? Let’s find out:

The theory of evolution is a widely accepted, though not proven, theory. If it were true, I have one simple question. Where are all the in-betweens currently in the process of evolving? Shouldn’t there be some people running around who are in the process of changing from monkeys?

That’s good! It’s rare to encounter an original variation on “Why are there still monkeys?” Let’s read on:

Science tells us that evolution is fact. But they don’t have the hard evidence to back it up. You’ve heard the term “missing link”? Sure it’s missing because it doesn’t now nor never did exist!

Another good point! Where is that missing link? We continue:

Science at one time didn’t know what the earth looked like, so they filled in the blank and pronounced the earth was flat!

Yes, that’s one of the great embarrassments of science. No doubt about it. Here’s more:

I don’t profess to know how God created the Heavens and the Earth, nor the time it took to do it. I just know that all the universe and all life here on Earth is miraculous, and not likely to have just occurred on its own at random.

He “just knows” that it’s all a miracle. We can’t argue with that. And now we come to the end:

I’m not a religious fanatic, just a practical-minded Democrat. And the belief in evolution is totally outrageous to me.

Great letter. Just what we needed to begin the weekend.

Copyright © 2011. 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

10 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #220: The Democrat

  1. Poe’s Law:
    “Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of Fundamentalism that SOMEONE won’t mistake for the real thing.”

    The give away was the writer claiming to be a Democrat

  2. Charley Horse says: “The give away was the writer claiming to be a Democrat”

    That was the best part!

  3. A pragmatic Democrat, no less.

  4. Here’s another letter written by the same guy: Obama has provided leadership that led to end of three dictators. He’s definitely a democrat.

  5. More than one bird in Clarksville.

    How could White write one so sensible letter and
    one so idiotic?

    My nose is atwitchin’

  6. IIRC, fairly recent polling from ?Gallup? showed that about 40% of self described Democrats are creationists. Independents and Republicans scored in at about 50% and 60% respectively. That almost all Republicans are creationists and all Democrats are good science supporting evolutionists is a myth.

    What does seem true, however, is most militant and aggressive creationists usually call themselves conservatives.

  7. Link to that poll.

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/108226/republicans-democrats-differ-creationism.aspx

    I was a little off on the Independents.

    Percentages who believe God created humans “as is in the last 10,000 years” — Republicans 60%; Independents 40%; Democrats 38%.

  8. Ceteris Paribus

    Those poll numbers would set up a terrific game of fantasy presidential election wagering.

    A William Jennings Bryan / Clarksville Nabob ticket for the Democrats vs any combination or permutation of the existing Republican list of creationist wackaloons.

    The Las Vegas odds makers would probably have to give up their honest profession and leave it to the astrologers to predict the outcome.

  9. If you think about it, it’s not surprising that 38% of Democrats would be creationists. Of that 38%, I wonder how many are black Baptists, and how many are Muslims? Probably most, I’d wager.

  10. Jack Hogan: “That almost all Republicans are creationists and all Democrats are good science supporting evolutionists is a myth. What does seem true, however, is most militant and aggressive creationists usually call themselves conservatives.”

    What especially frustrates me about that myth is how little we “Darwinists” do to epose it, even though doing so would greatly help our case. Also, what I find is that the militant ones (I call them “anti-evolution activists”) go out of their way to call themseves “conservatives,” specifically to hide the fact that they’re really authoritarians. Same when they go out of their way to call themselves “Christians” in an attempt to hide that they’re really Fundamentalists, from whom many (most?) Christians distance themselves.

    The irony that I offten note is how “conservative Christians” demand that Johnny get credit for wrong answers on the test, and that teachers be allowed to teach what has not earned the right to be taught as science – all at taxpayers’ expense.