Creationist Wisdom #657: Seek the Truth

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in The Columbus Dispatch of Columbus, Ohio, the state capital, and it’s titled Law would open schoolhouse doors to God. The newspaper has a comments section.

Because today’s writer isn’t a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote him by using his full name. His first name is Garry (yes, that’s how he spells it). Excerpts from his letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

I applaud proponents of House Bill 425 for their attempt to re-establish the constitutional rights of our students (Dispatch article, “Bill seeks more room for religion,” Sunday). It’s a sad commentary on the state of our country that we’ve allowed intimidation from the American Civil Liberties Union and others to limit our right to religious expression.

Here’s that earlier article to which Garry refers: Bill would allow more religious expression in Ohio schools. It says:

Current law allows a district to limit the exercise of a student’s religion to lunch periods or other non-instructional time when students are free to associate. A House committee has started hearings on a bill that would eliminate that restriction. Instead, House Bill 425 says students may engage in religious expression “before, during, and after school hours … to the same extent that a student is permitted to engage in secular activities.

That could cause trouble in the classroom, but it’s not, strictly speaking, a creationism bill. If you’re interested, this is a link to the text of House Bill 425 (pdf file), and this is where you can track the bill’s progress through the legislature. It was just filed, and it’s currently sitting in the House Community and Family Advancement committee. Okay, back to Garry’s letter:

In this the land of liberty, students should not be told when they are permitted to express their religious beliefs, or that they may not examine the scientific evidence that supports a supernatural conclusion.

Yeah — in this land of liberty, there should be no restrictions on students at all. But what, specifically, is Garry talking about? Let’s read on:

It’s interesting that the ACLU would bring up evolution in voicing its opposition to this bill. What civil liberty is it seeking to protect in not allowing the critical examination of evolution? Currently, evolutionary ‘theory’ is taught as dogma in our public schools. Students aren’t permitted to examine the strong scientific evidence against the theory, nor examine evidence that supports anything other than a godless conclusion as the explanation for life.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Let students examine the “strong scientific evidence” against evolution. Garry continues:

Shouldn’t we seek the truth in our scientific endeavors, regardless of where the evidence points?

Yes, we certainly should! Ah, now Garry gives us some examples of what he wants students to explore:

This used to be the case with the founders of modern science, such as Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler, Francis Bacon, Louis Pasteur, and Blaise Pascal, but at some point along the way we decided to limit truth to only that which doesn’t include God.

He’s right — schools should stop censoring all the supernatural evidence those guys uncovered! And now we come to the end of Garry’s letter:

Let’s again examine all the scientific evidence, and not limit our search for truth.

Great letter, Garry. Thanks for telling us about that bill in Ohio. We’ll be watching.

Copyright © 2016. 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

14 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #657: Seek the Truth

  1. Scientific evidence (which is natural by definition) for the Truth of God (which is supernatural by definition), how exactly does that work?

  2. God is unique. There is nothing like him.
    A proof is valid by virtue of it being an instance of pattern of inference. (Such that the conclusion is true whenever the premisses are true.)
    How can there be a valid proof of the existence of God?

  3. For Garry (sic):
    “Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when as when they do it from religious conviction.” (Pascal)
    “The Metaphysical proofs of God are so remote from the reasoning of men, and so complicated, that they make but little impression; and even if were this to serve some persons, it would be only during the instant of their seeing the demonstration, and an hour afterward they would fear they had been deceived.” (Pascal)
    “When miracles are admitted, every scientific explanation is out of the question.” (Kepler)
    “In every age, natural philosophy had a troublesome adversary and hard to deal with; namely superstition, and the blind and immoderate zeal of religion.” (Bacon)

    However, should this bill make it through the legislature, I would expect it to find favor with Kasich.

  4. Garry [sic] claims “Students aren’t permitted to examine the strong scientific evidence against the theory…”, apparently not recognizing that if there were any scientific evidence, either weak or strong, scientists would be busy studying it.

  5. There is no way to determine if any historical manifestation of the supernatural is unique. The one trend we can be sure of is that without the magical qualities of belief, gods tend to diminish into the realm of myth. The life cycle of “deity announcing itself, deity has direct involvement, deity ceases direct engagement, deity becomes historic, deity becomes myth” is pretty much the only consistent pattern history leaves us with. But as Garry says “Shouldn’t we seek the truth in our scientific political endeavors, regardless of where the evidence points?”

  6. If school districts are telling students that they can’t read a book (Bible, Koran, Diabetics, etc) or pray before or after schools, then that should be corrected. Not sure you need a new law – just need to educate teachers and administrators on what is a student’s constitutional right. Schools should have the ability to control proselytizing; no one should be held captive to evangelism or any kind – including “just say no” campaigns.

  7. Derek Freyberg

    “This used to be the case with the founders of modern science, such as Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler, Francis Bacon, Louis Pasteur, and Blaise Pascal, but at some point along the way we decided to limit truth to only that which doesn’t include God.”
    And then there was Laplace, who is reputed to have said to Napoleon, when asked why he hadn’t mentioned God in his discourse on secular variations of the orbits of Saturn and Jupiter, “I had no need of that hypothesis”.

  8. They want more religion in schools!!!! GREAT!!! I can bring in my cauldron, frog legs, eye of newt, and cast spells to do well on tests!!!!!
    And could consult my astrology chart to see if it would be a good day to take the test, and refuse on grounds of religion!!!! it not a good day!

  9. The legislators pushing for this bill should read and heed their holy book.

    Matthew 6: 5-6 —
    5″When you pray, you are not to be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. 6″But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you.”

  10. michaelfugate

    But they are hypocrites. I taught at a public school where the middle school principal allowed preachers on campus during lunch to proselytize captive students. One of the teachers who was agnostic at least asked if he could invite his Muslim friend drop by during lunch – somehow all the preachers disappeared soon after.

  11. @michaelfugate
    I wonder what would be the reaction if someone would ask a Catholic priest, or a Mormon missionary, or a Quaker pacifist.

  12. Let’s add Sharia to the curriculum while we are at it and see how you feel.

  13. I wonder how many of these creationists who invoke Newton’s religion in their support realise that he did not regard Jesus as God? If they did know, then, apart for his apparent use in bolstering their feeble arguments, most would not even accept that he was a Christian.

  14. These people want more religion in the schools? Does that include, Islam, Hinduism, Judaism–or even Roman Catholicism? >BWAHAHAHAHAAAA!

    Look at who’s pushing such legislation and you see that they are, overwhelmingly, fundamentalist Protestants who believe that only their beliefs are worthy of any respect.