Darwinism Still The State Sponsored Religion
The courts have once again upheld that the religion of Darwinism
(i.e. evolution) is the only religion recognizable as true and
teachable to our children. There was a time when this type of
edict from government to the people would have been heavily
frowned upon and might well have been met with loaded guns
pointed at those that attempted it. But not today.
As the school system in this country has migrated away from its
roots of community and church control to county, state and even
federal control things that are often frowned upon (i.e. the
teaching of religion under some guise of "separation of church
and state") is accepted as the norm. The criteria used to
justify it is simply can their be enough of a shroud to conceal
it as "science".
Let's not be coy. Darwinism is a religion. It has all the major
qualities of such. It is, as Webster's Dictionary defines, "a
cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and
faith". There is no proof of evolution on the macro scale but
merely faith that it exists. On the micro scale you have what
can best be described as adaptation but still very little in the
way of one species miraculously morphing into a new one.
Bacteria reproduce so fast that you can observe thousands of
generations in a relatively short time. And still there is no
recorded evidence of a rose springing forth from a petri dish.
Heck there isn't even evidence of a rose ancestor appearing!
But now the courts said that a school district in Dover, PA even
mentioning Intelligent Design as an alternative to Darwinism was
unconstitutional. Pretty good way to ensure only the religion of
choice gets exposure no?
Darwinism is only a theory. It is not science fact. Something
else the Darwinists don't like pointed out either. Webster's
also correctly defines "theory" as "a plausible or
scientifically acceptable general principle or body of
principles offered to explain phenomena "
or "a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or
investigation b : an unproved assumption"
In fact Darwinists hate having to recognize evolution as only a
theory so much that they are fighting another battle to keep
stickers off of text books that remind students of this in Cobb
County Ga. The stickers read simply (and correctly) "This
textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory,
not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material
should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and
critically considered."
But we cannot have that either! And the reason is because
Darwinism or the "Origin of the Species" fails one critical
test. That critical test is there is no starting point.
Most arguments with an evolutionist break down as you walk them
back through their theory.
"Where did life currently on Earth come from?" Darwinist: " It
evolved from species that previously existed."
"Do you have evidence of this?" Darwinist (if he/she is honest):
"Not hard evidence but we have a fossil record from which can
suppose this. Yes there are many anomalies evolution doesn't
account for and yes we don't have 'intermediate' species but it
works in theory."
"Fair enough. So where did those species that previously existed
come from?" Darwinist: "They evolved from a common ancestor."
"And the 'common ancestor' came from?" Darwinist: "It formed
chemically and spontaneously through chemistry in the primordial
ooze."
"And the primordial ooze came from?" Darwinist: "It formed after
billions of years and after the Big Bang."
"And what is the 'Big Bang'?" Darwinist: "A super dense ball of
matter exploded creating all the matter that currently exists."
"And where did this super dense ball come from?" Darwinist: "Uh
... um ... huh. Well I guess that it had just always existed or
was created out of nothing."
Please note the last line of that. It either always existed or
it was created out of nothing. Sound familiar? It should because
it is basically the same starting point you have with recognized
religions like Christianity and so on. You cannot prove it. You
simply accept it as faith. God has always existed and he created
the universe out of "nothing".
So what separates Darwinism from concepts such as Intelligent
Design? The answer is the guise of "science". The same guise
that made people think for years that the sun revolved around
the Earth and that the Earth was flat for that matter.
Listen. I have always been candid about my beliefs when it comes
to "evolution". This belief has always been that I have little
doubt that macro-evolution of some form does exist even though
it has never been proven. At the same time macro-evolution like
all other phenomena follow the rules of science even if we have
not discovered those rules to date. And all the rules of science
were created when a being that we know as God formed the
Universe. God doesn't break these rules because He doesn't have
to because He created them and allowed for the ultimate
scientific principle known as His Word to supercede all other
laws.
I believe that evolution exists because it is part of
Intelligent Design. And Intelligent Design simply states that
there is an Intelligence that guides the way the laws of nature
happen. It doesn't mean "creationism" although many have tried
to make it mean such. It simply means that there is something
smarter than we controlling the way things work.
And to many people that is a scary thing. Even to many
Christians and people of other faiths that should believe the
same thing but in slightly different ways.
But try to step away from the accepted principle of Darwinism as
the state sponsored religion and there will be Hell to pay until
communities and families reclaim their schools and their
children.