Why,
oh why, are the curricula of the schools the business of the courts? If
Pennsylvania wants to mention creationism, or to require three years of French
for graduation, it seems to me that these things are the business of parents in
Pennsylvania.
by Fred Reed The Jewish Press 4915 16th Avenue Brooklyn NY 11204 JewishPress.com Subscriptions: One year: Only $55 (52 issues). This is an excellent Orthodox Jewish newspaper. |
Yes, I know: In practice, both freedom of expression and local
government are regarded as ideals greatly to be avoided. The desire to centralize
government, impose doctrine, and punish doubt is never far below the surface,
anywhere. Thus our highly controlled media, our
“hate-speech” laws, our political correctness and, now, Evolutionary
Prohibition.
The Catholic Church once burned heretics. The Church of
Evolution savages them in obscure journals and denies them tenure and
publication. As a heretic I believe that I would prefer the latter, but the
intolerance is the same.
Why, oh why, are the curricula of the schools the business of
the courts? If Pennsylvania wants to mention creationism, or to require three
years of French for graduation, it seems to me that these things are the business
of parents in Pennsylvania.
I note that Compulsory Evolutionists are fellow travelers of the
regnant cultural Marxism, though I don’t think they are aware of it. They
display the same hermetic materialism, the same desire to suppress dissent by
the application of centralized governmental power, the same weird hostility to
religion. They do not say, “I think Christianity is nonsense and will therefore
ignore it,” but rather “These ideas shall not be permitted.”
The justification often is pseudo-constitutional: “the
separation of church and state.” Neither the phrase nor the idea is found in
the Constitution. If, for example, it is unconstitutional to have a nativity
scene on a town square, why did no one – certainly including the Found-ing Fathers – notice this until about 1950? One might point
out, fruitlessly, that Creationism, communism, Christianity, and capitalism are
all major intellectual currents and therefore ought to be explained to the
young. Not likely. The free market of ideas applies only to one’s own ideas.
Now, what grave consequences are thought to await if children
hear briefly in school an argument that they have heard a dozen times in the
course of ordinary life? Will the foundations of civilization crack? Will the
birds of the air plunge, appalled, to earth? Will the planets shudder in their
orbits and fall inward in dismay?
Or is it thought that kids attracted to the sciences will
abruptly change their course through life and enter the clergy? That
applications to graduate school in biochemistry will cease? Children learn (or
did) of the Greek gods and goddesses, and that ancient people believed the
earth rode on the back of a giant turtle. I have not heard that they now
sacrifice oxen to Athena.
One plausible explanation for this rigid evolutionary
monotheism, though I think an incorrect one, is a fear that the children might
come to believe in Creationism. Unlikely, but again, so what? A belief in Creationism
does not prevent one from working in the sciences. A goodly number of
scientists ... are in fact Christian (or Jewish, editor) and, some of
them are creationists. Others are Buddhists or Hindus. The only thing for which
acceptance of creationism renders one unsuitable is evolutionism.
A more likely explanation is a fear that children might realize
that a great deal of evolution, not having been established, must be accepted
on faith, and that a fair amount of it doesn’t make a lot of sense. While
creationism is unlikely to convert children into snake-handlers, it does
suggest that Orthodox Evolution can be examined critically. Bad juju, that.
Now, an entertaining way to study the politics of this is to ask
the evolutionists questions that a scientist would answer (since scientists are
not ashamed not to know things), but that an ideologue can’t afford to. They
are simple:
u
Has the chance occurrence of life been demonstrated in the laboratory? Yes or no.
u
Do we really know – as distinct from guess, hope, or imagine – of what the
primeval seas consisted? Yes or no.
u
Do we know – as distinct from guess, pray, wave our arms, and hold our breath
until we turn blue – what seas would be needed for the chance formation of
life? Yes or no.
u
Can we show mathematically, without crafted and unsupportable assumptions, that
the formation of life would be probable in any soup whatever? Yes or no.
I
once posed these questions in a column and, in another place, to a group of
committed proponents of evolution. A tremendous influx of e-mail resulted. Much
of it was predictable. Many Christians congratulated me for disproving
evolution, which I had not done. The intelligent and independent-minded wrote
thoughtfully. Of the Knights Templar of Evolution, none – not one – answered
the above yes-or-no questions. They ducked. They dodged. They waxed wroth. They
called names.
This is the behavior not of scientists but
of true believers. I have spent countless hours as a reporter talking to
scientists, as distinct from zealots with a scientific background. Without exception
that I can remember, they were rational, honest, and forthcoming. Yes, they
were often trying to establish a pet theory. But they said, “I think this is
so, and here’s the evidence, and I think it’s pretty solid, but I still need to
show this or that, and no, we haven’t, but I hope we will.” If I expressed
doubts, they either showed me clearly and civilly why I was wrong, or said,
“Good point. Here’s what we think.”
Parenthetically, my impression, based on a
small sample, is that the more incensed of the evolutionists tend to be either
of the hard Right or the hard Left: those who need to believe one thing categorically
seem to need to believe other things categorically. Which means that if they
are wrong, they are unlikely to notice it... Dispassionate discussion with
dogmatic evolutionists is not possible. How sad.
Editor's Note: The Leftists who now control our education
system have eliminated any freedom of speech about evolution. You cannot even
discuss the scientific evidence against evolution. It is simply acknowledged as
fact without supporting evidence. Likewise, there is unlimited freedom of
speech on campuses accusing Israel of all kinds of crimes, most of it being
fabricated lies. However, no defense of Israel is permitted on most college
campuses.
Meanwhile, Islamic crimes against humanity are ignored. If they are brought up, you are called "Islamaphobic." RAC