Post: The word by itself evokes for me a thick, square cedar pole standing up from, and presumably sunk down into the ground, waiting for the laundry line. Suppose you post a letter to the officer who posthumously posted your father to his army post in the post-war era. Words…
Christians who declare their belief in Biblical creationism leave all sorts of unanswered questions in their wake. Here are a few.
Question 1: Why are there so many near-human animals?
Let’s say Darwinian evolution is “just a theory” and that one of the Bible’s two creation stories (yes, there are two in Genesis) correctly explains the origin of life on earth. Why, then, do apes and monkeys exist? Why did God create animals — especially chimps and bonobos — that are almost genetically identical to humans? If God created us in his image, wouldn’t it have made a lot more sense for no other animal on earth to be even remotely similar to us? Why would God create so many other primates — ANIMALS — that share over 95% of our DNA? Moreover, why would God give them social behaviors nearly the same as ours; language skills nearly the same as ours; emotions, the ability to use tools, even bipedalism, compassion and self-awareness all nearly the same as ours? Indeed, if we look at virtually any metric of mental ability, the average rhesus monkey behaves more human-like than did the brain damaged Terri Schiavo, whom President Bush and many Republican Members of Congress rushed to “save” because they believed she displayed human consciousness. Assuming that no species on our planet arose from evolution, but from instantaneous creation by God, why are there so many near-human animals? Why would God do this?
As reported by the St. Louis Post Dispatch, conservatives got together for a large rally in St. Louis this week. One of the speakers, Catholic Archbishop Raymond Burke, argued that it was “the legalized destruction of human life.” A radio executive chimed in: “Have you ever noticed that when the devil tries to sell you an evil idea, he usually wraps it in a lie?”
To what were they referring? The killing of “babies,” they argued. The speakers were arguing that a research procedure called “somatic cell nuclear transfer” (SCNT) was literally killing babies.
Never mind that the 5-day old babies they were talking about are microscopic clumps of cells (containing valuable stem cells). Never mind that they can’t really be considered individuals; they could still split into more than one baby (until 12 days of age) or they might not grow into any baby at all (“God” himself spontaneously aborts hundreds of thousands of these babies every year).
Donn Rubin, the chairman of the Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures, the group promoting a ballot proposal promoting stem cell research in Missouri, condemned the conservative rally. The Coalition’s website describes the Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative in detail. For another description, see also here. Rubin reminded the crowd that the ballot proposal has the support of more than 100 groups, including research centers, health care groups and patient groups.
What is SCNT? Is it really killing babies? According to the International Society for Stem …
OK, so ten years ago I had this idea of writing a short story about a high school attended by praying mantises. The prom was coming up and many of the boy mantises were nervous. Actually all of them except for a reticent bespectacled boy mantis named George who had…
In 2004, George Bush was reelected. We can debate endlessly over whether or not he stole that election, but it’s beside the point for this rant. Besides, four million popular votes seems like a big wad to steal.
What we need to figure out if we want to have any possibility of turning this misdirected ship around is WHY SO MANY PEOPLE VOTED FOR THE REPUBLICAN RIGHT? Not even just Republicans–there are decent Republicans that I would support (Arlan Spector comes to mind, as does a pre-2004 John McCain)–but the rabid fundie far right wing of the party, the wing that is destroying it and trying to turn this country into something like a theocracy.
So what was it?
The factor listed by most exit polls in Middle America was–is–Moral Values. Not in California or the Northeast corridor, but in the Heartland.
Moral Values.
I had thought for a long time that the issues driving Bush supporters floated between abortion, school prayer, and taxes. I’m now not so sure tax cuts are that important–these people have got to realize that if Bush continues his policies, at some point a huge bill is going to come due.
The furor over gay marriage in the last months of the campaign underscores the exit polls. Moral Values.
If I thought the votes were driven by the deep morality stemming from a Kantian apprehension of the nature of the right, the good, and the universalizable as determined by a focused application of the categorical …