Darwinian Conservatism: How Darwinian science refutes the Left’s most sacred beliefs.

The American Thinker ^ | 23 July 2006 | Jamie Glazov and Larry Arnhart

[curiosity]

The theory of evolution is a common force used against Christianity -- which is a common force against Conservatism. Simple story.

You are mistaken. The vast majority of evolutionary scientists don't say anything about religion.

Yes, a handful of scientists (we're talking maybe three or four) attempt to use the theory of evolution to argue against religion. There are just as many evolutionary scientists who oppose them and aruge that evolution in no way conflicts with Christianity: Kenneth Miller, Francis Collins, and Keith Miller, just to name a few.

Evolution is neither against God nor for God. Evolution simply tells us about the natural world. It says nothing about the supernatural and nothing about moral philosophy.

[cornelis]

The abuse of evolutionary theory can be politically advantageous, especially for -isms.

[curiosity]

Maybe. If that is the case, how is it supposed to be "useful" to conservatism while perfectability and imperfectability of human nature clearly are not neutral?

Well, frankly, I disagree with this article on this matter. I don't think the theory of evolution can tell you whether human nature is perfectable or not.

It's imperfectability is simply an empirical fact that's true regardless of whether evolution is true or not.

[stands2reason]

I don't believe a word of it. I think llt made it up.

[A0ri]

Puuuuhhhleeeeeaaaasseeee.

Evolution's core argument is that life was created from raw natural process. This is against the Christian philosophy that life was generated from a Superior Being.

See the conflict? What purpose is a Superior Being, if life doesn't require Him?

[b_sharp]

"Really? I attend a Baptist university. I have attended multiple Churches across the U.S. None of which supported evolution. "

Read for comprehension.

CarolinaGuitarman said that most who accept evolution in the US are Christian. He did not say that most Christians accept evolution.

[stands2reason]

There is no "ideal order" in evolution, it doesn't have a teleological purpose. It's a mechanism.

[RightWhale]

What purpose is a Superior Being

That is not for us to know and the question ought not be asked.

[A0ri]

Thanks for clarification, although he does not explain the type of evolution is not explained.

[Dimensio]

Evolution's core argument is that life was created from raw natural process.

The theory of evolution makes no such statement.

[Gumlegs]

What would any possible statistic prove regarding your church-going habits?

[A0ri]

Only to those who disguise it as such. Are you implying that it has an intelligent aspect?

:o)

[curiosity]

There is no "ideal order" in evolution, it doesn't have a teleological purpose. It's a mechanism.

Yes, that's why I disagree with the article. There's nothing inherently liberal or conservative about evolution. It's just a fact of nature, and I really don't see how this fact supports one political philosophy or another.

[Dimensio]

Thanks for clarification, although he does not explain the type of evolution is not explained.

What do you mean by "type of evolution"?

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Really?"

Really.

"I attend a Baptist university. I have attended multiple Churches across the U.S. None of which supported evolution."

Your very limited sample doesn't mean anything. Most people who accept evolution in the USA are also Christians.

"Show me a statistic proving otherwise."

Ok:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm

1997-NOV data is little changed. Note the massive differences between the beliefs of the general population and of scientists:

Belief system	Creationist view	Theistic evolution	Naturalistic Evolution
Group of adults	God created man pretty much in his present form at one time within the last 10,000 years.	Man has developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process, including man's creation.	Man has developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life. God had no part in this process.
Everyone	44%	39%	10%
Scientists	5%	40%	55%

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_prac2.htm

"Polling data from the 2001 ARIS study, described below, indicate that: bullet 81% of American adults identify themselves with a specific religion: bullet 76.5% (159 million) of Americans identify themselves as Christian."

If 76% of Americans identify themselves as Christians, and if about 80% of those who accept evolution believe in God, the only possibility is that a majority of those who accept evolution in the USA are Christian.

[Senator Bedfellow]

What would any possible statistic prove regarding your church-going habits?

I'd say there's an 87% chance that he/she did attend a Baptist university, and a 78% chance that he/she has attended multiple churches across the US, none of which supported evolution. Of course, 93% of all statistics are made up on the spot. 77% of people know that.

[stands2reason]

This evo is pro-life.

Any more false assumptions you want to toss out?

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Evolution's core argument is that life was created from raw natural process. This is against the Christian philosophy that life was generated from a Superior Being."

Unless the Creator used natural processes.

[Gumlegs]

77.3%

[cornelis]

Science doesn't exclude teleology in general and there is some idea of order in the concept of "natural selection" and "survival of the fittest." But see #122.

In any case, so far we have two votes against the article.