Posted on 06/03/2007 6:46:20 AM PDT by Jedi Master Pikachu
The current US presidential debates are almost certain to see the candidates asked to comment on spiritual issues, but some Americans are worried about the trend towards religiosity in public life.
At my twins' annual school camp in West Virginia, you are meant to leave your troubles behind. It is an idyllic couple of days - a communing with nature which my wife gallantly insists is simply too enjoyable for her to take part in - it has to be a dad's experience. Actually it is not that uncomfortable. The tents are sensible structures with plenty of room to stand up. There are rudimentary bunk beds you can bang your head on in the early morning. The setting is a reminder too of the size of the United States - only two hours from the nation's capital, these are woods and fields as empty and isolated as any in the Scottish Highlands. The kids love it. They and 20 other seven-year-olds, roast marshmallows by the campfire, catch tadpoles in the pond, and roam around, unwashed, at five in the morning in the early light of the West Virginia day, pointing their torches into each other's tents. Silence before breakfast "Did Cole see a bug and sleep in his dad's car? Did Peter's water bottle break? Did Talia's mum fall out of bed?" Etc etc, and then comes breakfast.
Breakfast is an indoors affair, not luxurious but hey this is America and these are middle class kids and some parents are beginning to flag by seven in the morning and there is a need for the familiar comforts of multi-coloured cereals and soy milk. First though - a silence. "Please take off your hats," asks the jolly camp counsellor (yes, that is what they call them). She looks down and up again. The silence lasts less than 30 seconds and my two children discover that there are pancakes with M&Ms inside them and we give the silence not another thought. But I am a foreigner here, an anthropologist, and one of the pitfalls of anthropology is that there are some things you have to be a member of the tribe to really get. Unbeknownst to me the silence has caused outrage, or to be more precise, has caused pleasure to some and great outrage to others. I discover this later when talking to a dad about the post silence debate which took place between certain concerned parents and the silence enforcing camp counsellor. Religious divide
Basically the problem is this: What was the silence? Was it contemplative or was it religious? The distinction to my English mind was unimportant. I am personally not religious but I am not fussed about the trappings of religion in the public space.
To me it is part of life, no big deal, but in modern America it is a big deal. Some parents believed that the breakfast silence was an attempt by a religious cabal to take over our camp, to insinuate their beliefs into our get-together, to steal the minds of our kids. Are they right to be in such a funk? I am not sure that they are. America is famously religious, infamously if you like, but try as they might, the real hard-line theocracy crowd repeatedly fail to get their ideas to fly. When you visit them, as I did, coincidentally, just days after the breakfast silence issue, you find a group of people in a funk comparable to that of the atheists.
I was at the Creation Museum in Kentucky, the day after it opened, a moment evangelicals should really have been celebrating with great gusto. And to an extent they were. The museum is a striking place, with wonderfully life-like models of Adam and Eve and the garden of Eden, and an airy, well put-together feel. But I did not get the impression from those in charge or from those visiting, that they considered themselves to be on the march in modern America. In fact the whole thing had a slightly beleaguered feel. One parent confided: "At last there's a place I can bring the kids where they are taught what we teach them at home." Another asked me almost plaintively whether I was convinced by the museum's planetarium where the sun was created after the Earth. Freedom of choice
I had to be honest and say that I was not, but I felt quite sorry as I did. There is nothing remotely convincing about the Creation Museum and frankly if it poses the threat to American science that some American critics claim it does, that seems to me to be as much a commentary on the failings of the scientific establishment as it is on the creationists.
There is a reason, I think, why theocracy will never fly in the United States and it has been touched on, inadvertently, by George Bush himself. Mr Bush often makes the point that the philosophy of the Islamic radicals, full of hate and oppression, would not be attractive to people who truly had the freedom to choose. Similarly the philosophy of the Old Testament, so much celebrated by some evangelicals here, has a limited power to enthral free people. At the Creation Museum, goggle-eyed children watch depictions of the Great Flood in which children and their mums and dads are consumed, because God is cross.
In a nation of kindly moderate people I am not sure this is the future. I put my faith - in America.
From Our Own Correspondent was broadcast on Saturday, 2 June, 2007 at 1130 GMT on BBC Radio 4. Please check the programme schedules for World Service transmission times.
|
Creationists are not asking that all people agree with them, much less are they demanding it. They simply have their beliefs--which is the Christian belief--on how the universe and life formed; they have scientifically backed up their argument to the same extent--if not more--than the Macroevolutionists; now, they merely seek recognition of their scientific model as a plausible alternative to the now standard Macroevolutionary viewpoint.
Webb mentions the Sun being created after the Earth (which it was). Obviously an attempt to make Creationists seem to be hairbrained idiots (P.S. Light was made before all the stars). Creationists still agree with their Macroevolutionist counterparts that the Sun is powered by nuclear fusion, its elemental composition, its distance (Creationists are also heliocentric--the Bible is silent on Earth's location in the universe, including the Solar System) from the Sun.
In almost all science pertaining to the here and now (or even recorded history), Creationists and Macroevolutionists are in concordance. It is chiefly on origins--a very small part of science--in which they disagree.
P.S. (P.P.S.?) Since this is Sunday, not expecting all that much sympathy, as a lot of Christian freepers could either be at or getting ready to go to church (it’s around seven here). It was just one of those articles that was so offensive and it was asking to be posted. (not everything posted is because it is found to be offensive, though).
ping.
Not intended offense to European freepers, but what a European attitude, that the Old Testament and the New Testament express two almost divergent views.
Hasn’t science exploded and made remarkable advances since about 1600 all the while most of its practiconers were Christian? Americans are too paranoid about all this. No one else sees the need to deny state funding to parochial schools, for instance.
“Creationism is NOT a threat to science”
Of course not. Superstition is the threat that wants to substitute supernatural explanations for phenomena and creationism is... wait a minute. Actually, it is a threat. Throwing up your hands at puzzles and saying, “God did it so let God do it,” isn’t how transistors or pickle slicers come to be.
Sorry, false.
Creationism? Which version of it? There must be atleast a couple of hundreds of them. So, when you decide on Creationism, just remember that you just entered a tunnel that leads to a tunnel of its own- each flavour of Creationism leading to a spectacularly different hypothesis. Of course the human mind is creative, so this variety is not a surprise...
Suggest that you look up the definition of superstition. You may consider Creationism to be pseudoscience, but it isn’t superstition.
OK...so where did all matter come from? Don't have an answer? That's right, that it's always been is simply part of the "throwing up your hands at puzzles " explanation of macro-evolutionists. It's all part of the macro-evolution faith.
Have you actually 'seen' what Creationist views are? Your comment hints that you have not.
Creationism doesn't 'throw up hands at puzzles.' Using your analogy, those puzzle pieces are fit together in a separate way from the Macroevolutionist view. More clearly, both Creationists and Macroevolutionists have the evidence (your puzzle pieces), but disagree on the implication of those pieces--i.e. fossils, stars and galaxies millions of lightyears away, the distance to the edges of the universe seemingly almost the same in length.
Again, as for the threat Creationism supposedly poses to science, the only pseudoscience it poses a threat to is Macroevolution, which already is reliant on getting people suckered in when they're young so that they don't bring up some difficult questions when they grow up.
Also, it is a threat to science when those with a particular belief dogmatically and zealously (you could type religiously attack opposition to their viewpoint when the opposing model can stand on its own two feet.
Again, it seems as though you aren't familiar with what Creationism actually espouses. And suggest that you go look up some stuff about Creationism--from a Creationist source--before posting comments about Creationism which don't actually reflect the Creationist standpoint. There are many sources on the internet; you can just Google (or use another search engine--for its leftist leanings, Google is a very useful search engine) Creationism, and you should get some hits.
Thus, the English word "superstition," as understood from its original Latin meaning, implies a religion-like belief that stands outside the bounds of clerical religion. ... From the broadest perspective, all religion is a form of superstition.
Perhaps you are saying creationism is not religion/religious?
“That’s right, that it’s always been is simply part of the “throwing up your hands at puzzles “ explanation of macro-evolutionists. It’s all part of the macro-evolution faith.”
Well, no. Cosmology is a disciplined approach to the origin of matter. The hands thrown up are the ones saying matter must have come from an invisible in the sky because ancient camel herders thought so.
“getting people suckered in when they’re young so that they don’t bring up some difficult questions when they grow up.”
Thank, Pikachu. You’ve just emphasized on of my biggest complaints about religion. It’s like the mites or fleas present at the hatching of baby birds. The birds never have a chance to get rid of the pests when they are present at birth and stay on the bird through life.
Eventually we tell our kids, if they haven’t already figured it out, that there really is no tooth fairy or Santa Claus. When we feed them our superstitions as fact with room for doubt, it cripples their rationality.
I think it’s a horror, too.
Haven’t had my coffee yet. Should have read...
“as fact with NO room for doubt”
Leaving aside the creationist silliness in your post, if you find this article “so offensive” I’d suggest that you have an awfully thin skin. I read it, and it seemed if anything sympathetic to people of faith, their right to believe in whatever they want, and supportive of a place for religion in public life.
No, it's a threat to education. Creationists will have zero impact on scientists' work. However, if not resisted, they can and will undermine science education and generally increase the level of ignorance and superstition among the public at large.
The theory of evolution does not address this question.
Why is it that so many creationists think it does?
OK, then where did all matter come from? Something is eternal, either matter or God...and the thought that it's matter is irrational. Or will you resort to the last explanation I got from an evolutionist and claim matter popped into our dimension from an alternative one...which is no answer but simply a displacement of the inability to answer the question.
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.