Thursday, May 31, 2007

Who Cares What That Idiot Thinks?

In its continuing campaign to confer legitimacy on the creationism and intelligent design movement, The New York Times has today published an opinion piece written by Senator Sam Brownback. "What I Think About Evolution" is the kind of essay so blatantly dishonest that it isn’t even worth dignifying with a comment. You might want to read it though, bearing in mind that this lying ignoramus is running for president.

Here’s a taste:

...I believe, as do many biologists and people of faith, that the process of creation — and indeed life today — is sustained by the hand of God in a manner known fully only to him. It does not strike me as anti-science or anti-reason to question the philosophical presuppositions behind theories offered by scientists who, in excluding the possibility of design or purpose, venture far beyond their realm of empirical science.
Brownback — or, more likely, his ghostwriter — really went to town to obfuscate his meaning, eh? But in plain English, what that last sentence implies is: If a scientist doesn’t accept the concept of intelligent design or purpose, you've got to wonder if he or she is really being scientific. This, as everyone with half a brain knows, is the final unutilized product of the digestive process excreted from the anus of male bovines whose sexual and reproductive organs are intact.


Anonymous said...

I started to read it over at RDF, but could only get a few paragraphs in, then gave up.

He's a politician, running for office, in an election campaign. He'll say anything for the most votes.

Apparently he just did.

Rikertron said...

Agreed, that article seems a little too articulately-written :)

Regardless, its intentions were good enough; I'd have appreciated the opportunity to expound on a hot-seat answer I'd given if I were in the same situation as he was. In all honesty, the country is going to need a lot more Christians of *his* type (if he truly feels the way he purports in the article) if rationality is going to have any chance of gaining a stronger foothold in our society.

Compassionate Christians that are willing to give science a seat at the table represent a sort of soft underbelly to the scaly dragon that is the American Evangelical contingency; it is with these people that we have to strike our effective blows. They're the ones we will have to rely on to hold the door open... we just have to make sure we're prepared to attack with the right tools to bring about a change for the better while leaving as few behind as possible.

The Exterminator said...


Where in Brownback's essay do you see an honest appeal to rationality? I guess I must have missed it amidst all the Christian shilling.

And, by the way, it's not up to Christians to "give science a seat at the table." Not in any real-world lunchroom, anyway.

Anonymous said...

1. Brownback is a fuckwit
2. There is something dangerous in the water coolers at the NYT these days.


Maybe I should get a blogger identity.

rmacapobre said...

hmm interesting .. another bible freak running for president? why do americans put up with it ..

asterhealthsource said...

I agree with this topic.Very well written material which i found on your blog.Keep posting like this.
generic viagra

Carl said...

I'm not a Christian, but I've read the book