A lesson for the liberal elite

[freeandfun1]

A lesson for the liberal elite

I am happy to say the author is an acquaintance of mine.....

BERNARD MOON
A lesson for the liberal elite
By Bernard Moon | November 30, 2004

IN A recent speech at Tufts University, Andy Rooney reflected on the election and said, according to The Tufts Daily, that Christian fundamentalism is a result of "a lack of education. They haven't been exposed to what the world has to offer."

Those comments as well as the identification of the "bigoted Christian redneck" after Election Day in various editorials left me wondering: Where do these "liberal elites" get this fictional image of Christians? When did this distorted perspective begin in our cultural history? How can I work to bridge this gap?

Rooney is reflective of the "liberal elite" in America that suffers from an odd disconnect with much of America and those who voted for President Bush. With respect to Isaac Asimov, I have decided to create "The Three Political Laws of Christian Fundamentalists" for the confused "liberal elite":

A Christian is a human being capable of independent, logical reasoning to the highest order.

A Christian is not a mindless entity seeking to obey public religious leaders, such as Pat Robertson, John Paul II, or Ralph Reed, when voting on the future of America.

A Christian must protect his own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the Bible.

These laws might serve a good base as these elites attempt to reach out to those in "Jesusland" over the next four years and work to correct their lenses that only allows them to see "homophobic knuckle-draggers."

In terms of practical examples supporting these laws, it might be good to look back in history and be reminded that some of these Christian fundamentalists served a significant part in our great nation's birth. From Sir Isaac Newton to George Washington Carver, from Abraham Lincoln to Woodrow Wilson to Martin Luther King Jr., these were all what liberal elites such as Andy Rooney would define as "uneducated, uninformed Christian fundamentalists" simply based on their religious beliefs.

There also seems to be a myth traveling around certain intellectual circles that science and the insanity of Christian fundamental doctrine cannot coexist. Again, history serves to prove this wrong and acts as a reminder. Each of the following people held strong beliefs -- "extremist beliefs," some would say -- as Christians and sought to reveal the work of God through their contributions.

For some liberal minds that cannot reach to their grade school days, I made a summary of their accomplishments:

Johannes Kepler was a mathematician and astronomer who discovered the laws of planetary motion and fathered the study of celestial mechanics.

Galileo Galilei was the inventor of the telescope, discovered the laws governing falling bodies, and made numerous astronomical discoveries.

Antony van Leeuwenhoek was the father of microbiology and discovered bacteria, blood cells, and other things beyond the naked eye.

Robert Boyle was a natural philosopher, founder of modern chemistry, and discovered the nature of gas, which is now called Boyle's Law.

Christians always had intellectual giants and agents of change whose faith did not conflict with becoming a great inventor, statesman, or advocate of human progress. From Cyrus McCormick to Charles Malik to Fyodor Dostoyevski to Mother Teresa, the driving force behind their intellect, sweat, and compassion was their faith in Jesus Christ.

These people are representative of the millions of evangelical Christians from every corner of our world and every upbringing. Not just poor, uneducated, and isolated people from middle America.

I grew up in the Midwest with a familiar story to most Americans. My family members and I have attended Ivy League institutions, expounded upon Emerson and Whitman, lived abroad, and chatted endlessly on various topics in Upper West Side cafes.

Oddly enough, we believe in the deity of Jesus Christ and the literal translation of the Bible. We also believe in the necessity of the separation of church and state, know that Jesus would not be a Republican nor claim allegiance to any earthly organization, do not hate Jews, and do not hate gays and lesbians. Lastly, we do not want to establish a Christian kingdom, since the only one we should have our eyes on is the eternal kingdom.

So please do not hate or fear us. We seem to be misunderstood with multiple myths surrounding our beliefs, motivation, and existence.

Bernard Moon is a freelance writer in San Francisco.

 

[dmp]

That is a very very good piece.

 

[Bonnie]

Fantastic!!!

 

[Mariner]

piece. What's the lesson, that scientists have been Christians? Of course they have, and many will continue to be. Cambridge is chock full of churches, right alongside the great universities.

What makes it truly strange, though, is that the scientific discoveries of each person mentioned were all abhorrent to many Christians at the time the discovery was made. Galileo's persecution for observing that Jupiter appeared to have moons is legendary, and resulted in a formal apology from the Vatican in 1993 (if I remember right). Kepler's beliefs can hardly be called Christian--have you read his work? His system was metaphysical and mathematical, based on the Greek idea of the harmony of the spheres. and his laws of planetary motion helped put the nail in the coffin of the Christian idea that since man was "obviously" the center of the universe, therefore man's home, earth, must "obviously" be central too. Van L's microscopic discoveries were treated with the same disdain as Galileo's, though he wasn't persecuted. Boyle too challenged notions of vacuum, air, and space which Christians had been teaching (incorrectly) for many centuries.

I think the writer is trying to make the point that these nominal Christians did not see a conflict between their work and their religion. That's true. But many other Christians did see such a conflict, so perhaps the real lesson is not for "liberal elites" but for conservatives: be open-minded to strange-sounding scientific ideas, such as evolution, or risk obsolescence.

Mariner.

 

[musicman]

I submit that evolution is every bit as much a faith-based theory as is intelligent design - or more.

 

[Mariner]

Evolution can be seen in action every day. You and I, and every other human, have on average 300 unique mutations. Some of these mutations have no effect. Others are deleterious (and result in the spontaneous miscarriage of many pregnancies). Others confer evolutionary benefit and continue on in the population. Our lifespans are so short that we can't easily observe human evolution (although we can observe it--consider the fascinating case of sickle cell anemia, which provides protection against malaria--populations where malaria is treated evolve to have less SS anemia, while those where it is not do not). However, we can easily observe evolution at work in many other populations. Bacteria, for example, constantly evolve resistance to antibiotics. Insects evolve resistance to pesticides.

As I've said here on this topic before--if you don't believe in evolution, skip your flu shot, since it is evolution of the influenza virus that gives us new strains to battle every year.

I agree that it's an astonishing idea, that organic compounds can self-organize into reproducing creatures wtih consciences, but no more astonishing than, say, quantum mechanics, which completely undermines "common sense" notions of causality, time, and space--and yet is the most accurate theory in the history of science, making predictions correct to 40 decimal places.

But the other problem with ID is that it's not a theory. You can't test it or prove it wrong (it could be proved right if God took out ads in the world's newspapers taking credit, I guess). Therefore it fails the most basic requirement for a scientific theory: falsifiability. So if you don't like evolution, and would like to propose an alternate theory, then you have to find something falsifiable that explains 100s of thousands of facts from fossils to DNA findings to the daily observation of evolution in other creatures. So far, no other theory has arisen, though anyone is welcome to try.

I think if many people studied evolution harder, they'd become convinced. I strongly suggest starting with Darwin himself. After all, the large majority of the world's Christian scientists accepted evolution a century ago after reading his work.

Mariner.

 

[Bonnie]

Evolution can be seen in action every day. You and I, and every other human, have on average 300 unique mutations. Some of these mutations have no effect. Others are deleterious (and result in the spontaneous miscarriage of many pregnancies). Others confer evolutionary benefit and continue on in the population. Our lifespans are so short that we can't easily observe human evolution (although we can observe it--consider the fascinating case of sickle cell anemia, which provides protection against malaria--populations where malaria is treated evolve to have less SS anemia, while those where it is not do not). However, we can easily observe evolution at work in many other populations. Bacteria, for example, constantly evolve resistance to antibiotics. Insects evolve resistance to pesticides.

As I've said here on this topic before--if you don't believe in evolution, skip your flu shot, since it is evolution of the influenza virus that gives us new strains to battle every year.

I agree that it's an astonishing idea, that organic compounds can self-organize into reproducing creatures wtih consciences, but no more astonishing than, say, quantum mechanics, which completely undermines "common sense" notions of causality, time, and space--and yet is the most accurate theory in the history of science, making predictions correct to 40 decimal places.

But the other problem with ID is that it's not a theory. You can't test it or prove it wrong (it could be proved right if God took out ads in the world's newspapers taking credit, I guess). Therefore it fails the most basic requirement for a scientific theory: falsifiability. So if you don't like evolution, and would like to propose an alternate theory, then you have to find something falsifiable that explains 100s of thousands of facts from fossils to DNA findings to the daily observation of evolution in other creatures. So far, no other theory has arisen, though anyone is welcome to try.

I think if many people studied evolution harder, they'd become convinced. I strongly suggest starting with Darwin himself. After all, the large majority of the world's Christian scientists accepted evolution a century ago after reading his work.

Mariner.

Tell me this then, where did DNA come from?
That is certainly intelligent design

 

[dmp]

Evolution can be seen in action every day. You and I, and every other human, have on average 300 unique mutations. Some of these mutations have no effect. Others are deleterious (and result in the spontaneous miscarriage of many pregnancies). Others confer evolutionary benefit and continue on in the population. Our lifespans are so short that we can't easily observe human evolution (although we can observe it--consider the fascinating case of sickle cell anemia, which provides protection against malaria--populations where malaria is treated evolve to have less SS anemia, while those where it is not do not). However, we can easily observe evolution at work in many other populations. Bacteria, for example, constantly evolve resistance to antibiotics. Insects evolve resistance to pesticides.

As I've said here on this topic before--if you don't believe in evolution, skip your flu shot, since it is evolution of the influenza virus that gives us new strains to battle every year.

I agree that it's an astonishing idea, that organic compounds can self-organize into reproducing creatures wtih consciences, but no more astonishing than, say, quantum mechanics, which completely undermines "common sense" notions of causality, time, and space--and yet is the most accurate theory in the history of science, making predictions correct to 40 decimal places.

But the other problem with ID is that it's not a theory. You can't test it or prove it wrong (it could be proved right if God took out ads in the world's newspapers taking credit, I guess). Therefore it fails the most basic requirement for a scientific theory: falsifiability. So if you don't like evolution, and would like to propose an alternate theory, then you have to find something falsifiable that explains 100s of thousands of facts from fossils to DNA findings to the daily observation of evolution in other creatures. So far, no other theory has arisen, though anyone is welcome to try.

I think if many people studied evolution harder, they'd become convinced. I strongly suggest starting with Darwin himself. After all, the large majority of the world's Christian scientists accepted evolution a century ago after reading his work.

Mariner.

Micro and Macro Evolution. One of those things happens. The other simply does not/there is no(or VERY little evidence) evidence to support.

 

[dmp]

Tell me this then, where did DNA come from?

Random Chance.

 

[no1tovote4]

Random Chance.

Right, nature just stumbled upon it while sitting in the circle getting baked with her friends. You know how deep your thoughts are then!

 

[Bonnie]

Random Chance.

:teeth: Yeah?

 

[Deornwulf]

Mariner, you apparently didn't get the message. Go back and read it again.

 

[dmp]

Yup. Everything we know about life and biology is pure dumb luck. The distance of the earth to the Sun. The distance of the Moon to the Earth...everything. Our DNA sequencing.. Pure Coinsidence. Nothing more. But for a few degrees on axis, or a few thousand miles from the sun, and poof! nothing happens.

Random Chance.

 

[Bonnie]

Where is the missing link then???

 

[dmp]

Where is the missing link then???

Right Here

 

[Bonnie]

Right Here

Pretty good!!

Drumroll please!!

 

[Thornton]

Being a spiritualist, I have moved away from organized religion with all it's pat answers and man made laws attributed to a 'god.' Don't get me wrong, I don't ever deny the religious beliefs of others being what works for them. It just stopped working for me a long time ago.

Thing is when you let go of brain washing and religious teachings and look to your inner self for answers and what makes sense to you, then eveolution just doesn't work either. Between the universe and how all things cosmic are placed and rotated to give us all we need here on earth and the needs of the human body, well to believe that a greater being, intellegent and powerful did not set it all in place but it just happened by evolution makes no sense. We'd have to ask if our evolution adapted to the universe or if the universe adapted to our needs. It's not logical that something turned into a creature that adapted to the universe.

Even if you believe the big bang theory, fine. But then I have to ask myself where did the stuff come from that banged? It just was there, you say? Really? There how? There from where? Nothing as big as a universe just is. So answer that. Where did teh universe that just *banged* come from?

 

[Merlin1047]

Tell me this then, where did DNA come from?
That is certainly intelligent design

DNA was floating around in that mysterious "gas cloud" that exploded and formed the universe. As planets precipitated out of the gas cloud explosion, individual DNA strands combined and waited around to attach themselves to the single-celled organisms which somehow sprang to life.

I thought EVERYBODY knew that.

:teeth:

 

[no1tovote4]

DNA was floating around in that mysterious "gas cloud" that exploded and formed the universe. As planets precipitated out of the gas cloud explosion, individual DNA strands combined and waited around to attach themselves to the single-celled organisms which somehow sprang to life.

I thought EVERYBODY knew that.

:teeth:

I like the Pot Circle Theory better.

 

[TheEnemyWithin]

Being a spiritualist, I have moved away from organized religion with all it's pat answers and man made laws attributed to a 'god.' Don't get me wrong, I don't ever deny the religious beliefs of others being what works for them. It just stopped working for me a long time ago.

Thing is when you let go of brain washing and religious teachings and look to your inner self for answers and what makes sense to you, then eveolution just doesn't work either. Between the universe and how all things cosmic are placed and rotated to give us all we need here on earth and the needs of the human body, well to believe that a greater being, intellegent and powerful did not set it all in place but it just happened by evolution makes no sense. We'd have to ask if our evolution adapted to the universe or if the universe adapted to our needs. It's not logical that something turned into a creature that adapted to the universe.

Even if you believe the big bang theory, fine. But then I have to ask myself where did the stuff come from that banged? It just was there, you say? Really? There how? There from where? Nothing as big as a universe just is. So answer that. Where did teh universe that just *banged* come from?

Don't ask what God can do for you, but what you can do for God.

P.S. The Big Bang Theory is moronic. They say it began as a "cosmic egg" which exploded, creating the universe. Where did the cosmic egg come from??