Posted on 12/27/2004 2:34:25 PM PST by Ed Current
The most censored speech in the United States today is not flag-burning, pornography or the press. The worst censors are those who prohibit classroom criticism of the theory of evolution.
A Chinese scholar observed, "In China we can criticize Darwin but not the government. In America you can criticize the government but not Darwin."
Polls show that the vast majority of Americans reject the theory of evolution, as have great scientists such as William Thomas Kelvin and Louis Pasteur. But that does not stop an intolerant minority from trying to impose a belief in the ape-to-man theory on everyone else.
Local school boards have finally had enough of this tyranny. From Georgia to Pennsylvania to Ohio to Wisconsin to Kansas, school boards are finally moving toward allowing criticism of Darwin's theory.
The Darwinists have propped up their classroom dominance by the persistent use of frauds and flacks. The fraudulent pro-evolution embryo drawings of Ernst Haeckel littered schoolbooks for 100 years, and it took specific action by the Texas Board of Education to keep them out of current textbooks even after the New York Times exposed Haeckel's deception.
Many textbooks feature pictures of giraffes stretching their necks to feed high off of trees, but genetics and observed feeding habits disprove that as a basis for evolution of their long necks. Moreover, the striking beauty of the colored pattern on the giraffes illustrates that design, not merely usefulness, is what animates our world.
Continued censorship of criticism invites additional fraud, so evolution has suffered more embarrassments than any other scientific theory. The Piltdown man was a lie taught to schoolchildren for decades, even featured in the John Scopes Monkey Trial textbook, and only five years ago a dinosaur-bird fossil hoax was presented as true on the glossy pages of National Geographic.
If Darwinists want to teach that whales, which are mammals, evolved from black bears swimming with their mouths open, we should surely be entitled to criticize that. Yet school libraries have refused to accept books critical of evolution, even when written by college professors.
Responding to the majority of their constituents, Georgia's Cobb County recently authorized a textbook disclaimer saying "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."
The American Civil Liberties Union claims this is unconstitutional and is seeking out supremacist judges to order classroom curricula to continue the censorship and forbid an open mind about evolution. If the theory of evolution were well supported, there would be no reason to oppose open debate about scientific claims.
In December 2004, a world-famous champion of atheism, Antony Flew, announced his conversion to acceptance of intelligent design underlying our world. The Dallas Morning News observed, "If the scientific data are compelling enough to cause an atheist academic of Flew's reputation to recant most of his life's work, why shouldn't Texas schoolchildren be taught the controversy?"
At 81, Flew can speak out because he is now free from the peer pressure that silences younger colleagues who fear loss of jobs, funding, or even dreams of winning a Nobel Prize. Evolution critics Fred Hoyle and Raymond Damadian were unjustly denied Nobel Prizes and their work was instead recognized by awards to less-deserving others.
Darwinists know they cannot persuade skeptical adults, so they try to capture impressionable schoolchildren. At our expense and against our wishes, children are taught that the world exists only for what is useful, not by design.
To typical schoolchildren full of wonder, we live in a world best described as a marvelous work of art. The snowflakes that grace us at Christmastime typify the artistic beauty that bestows joy on all ages but, like an acid, evolution corrodes this inborn appreciation of beauty and falsely trains children to view themselves as mere animals no more worthy than dogs or cats.
There is a strong correlation between belief in natural selection and liberal views on government control, pornography, prayer in schools, abortion, gun control, economic freedom, and even animal rights. For the most part, the schools in the blue states carried in the 2004 presidential election by U.S. Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., are strongly pro-evolution, while the red states carried by President George W. Bush allow debate and dissent.
It should surprise no one that the United States, land of the free and home of the brave, has the lowest percentage of evolution believers in the world. The highest percentage lived in the former East Germany.
The U.S. Senate of former Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., quietly slipped a provision into the No Child Left Behind Act that requires, by the 2007-2008 school year, science testing by grade 5. That gives censors the authority to force 10-year-olds to believe and defend evolution.
It is long past time for parents to realize they have the right and duty to protect their children from the intolerant evolutionists. Hooray for courageous school boards that are finally rejecting censorship and allowing debate.
Things you cannot criticize or question in America:
1) Minorities. 'Nuff said.
2) Darwin, true that.
But let's press a few buttons, shall we?
3) The Holocaust. It's "hate" to say that not exactly six million Jews died in the Holocaust. The figure of four million Jews estimated to have perished at Auschwicz has been dialed down to an estimated total of all persons (Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, etc.) killed at that camp of 1.5 million. But 6million - 2.5 million = 6million unless you want to go to jail in any European country or Canada. Merely questioning details will get you called a "Nazi!".
Of course, I'm eagerly awaiting my first denunciation for saying this.
4) Motivations for the US Civil War. You'd better say 'slavery' or you'll be in hot water.
5) Pre-WW2 US views about Adolf Hitler, Stalin, France, etc. Don't tell me you never wondered where Orwell got his inspiration?
6) American Communists. Come on! It was all a made up farce by McCarthy! There were no Commies in America! The Rosenbergs were VICTIMS!
But the facts say McCarthy was a hero. Just don't say so in public.
The list goes on. We talk about free speech and restrain it whenever we can.
Non-answer. Do you have something to hide?
"Well, yes, if indeed any Darwinists were teaching that.
Are they?"
Kind of, yeah. I've heard them say that whales are a branch of the evolutionary tree of swine.
Whice explains why whale meat tastes so good! Yum! (:
You confuse ridicule with censorship.
For crying out loud man, if you have a point, make it. What does your big block of text on politics have to do with evoltuion?
Science is DICTATED BY FACTS, it is not a democracy, we do not VOTE on what science tells us.
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0482_0578_ZD.html
The only evidence in the record of the "received meaning and acceptation" of "creation science" is found in five affidavits filed by appellants. In those affidavits, two scientists, a philosopher, a theologian, and an educator, all of whom claim extensive knowledge of creation science, swear that it is essentially a collection of scientific data supporting the theory that the physical universe and life within it appeared suddenly, and have not changed substantially since appearing. See App. to Juris. Statement A-19 (Kenyon); id. at A-36 (Morrow); id. at A-41 (Miethe). These experts insist that creation science is a strictly scientific concept that can be presented without religious reference. See id. at A-19 - A-20, A-35 (Kenyon); id. at A-36 - A-38 (Morrow); id. at A-40, A-41, A-43 (Miethe); id. at A-47, A-48 (Most); id. at A-49 (Clinkert). At this point, then, we must assume that the Balanced Treatment Act does not require the presentation of religious doctrine.
READ THE INFO IN THE LINK!!!!!!!!!!
"One tiny detail is evolution explains much of objective reality, while "Creationism" simply lets those ignorant of basic science feel better."
Einstein was a Creationist. Not a fundamentalist Bible-pounder, but he made it clear that his belief in intelligent design of our universe was his only logical conclusion.
I'm sure he felt good about it, too.
Unless Scalia was present, and had a hand in the drafting of the Constitution, there is nothing there that is responsive to the question. Is there some reason you have to avoid giving a direct answer?
"Most folks believe not because they've done in-depth research into the subject but rather because the theory is so pervasive in our culture that they dont give it a second thought."
Give me a summary of what you know about germ theory Mulch. Nothing eh? Now, if you think colds are caused by viruses, you are a hypocrite!
Also, I know a great deal about evolution.
We have one of those dictionaries, and it is amazing to look up words in modern dictionaries and compare definitions.
"You confuse ridicule with censorship."
Say out loud at your job that only 3.5 million Jews died in the Holocaust and see how long you get to keep your job. If you live outside the US you won't even keep your freedom.
That isn't ridicule. It is censorship and oppression.
POST #32
Nice. It's good to find people who know what "regulate" meant in 1878. Most people today seem to think it means "micromanage".
"Einstein was a Creationist."
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp
Good grief, when the biggest believers in a 10k year old earth say you shouldn't use an argument, you know you need some new material my friend.
hehe, I can't believe someone actually said einstein was a creationist, you just made my day!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.