The courts have once again upheld that the religion of Darwinism (i.e. evolution) is the only religion recognizable as true and teachable to our children. There was a time when this type of edict from government to the people would have been heavily frowned upon and might well have been met with loaded guns pointed at those that attempted it. But not today.
As the school system in this country has migrated away from its roots of community and church control to county, state and even federal control things that are often frowned upon (i.e. the teaching of religion under some guise of "separation of church and state") is accepted as the norm. The criteria used to justify it is simply can their be enough of a shroud to conceal it as "science".
Let's not be coy. Darwinism is a religion. It has all the major qualities of such. It is, as Webster's Dictionary defines, "a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith". There is no proof of evolution on the macro scale but merely faith that it exists. On the micro scale you have what can best be described as adaptation but still very little in the way of one species miraculously morphing into a new one.
Bacteria reproduce so fast that you can observe thousands of generations in a relatively short time. And still there is no recorded evidence of a rose springing forth from a petri dish. Heck there isn't even evidence of a rose ancestor appearing!
But now the courts said that a school district in Dover, PA even mentioning Intelligent Design as an alternative to Darwinism was unconstitutional. Pretty good way to ensure only the religion of choice gets exposure no?
Darwinism is only a theory. It is not science fact. Something else the Darwinists don't like pointed out either. Webster's also correctly defines "theory" as "a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena " or "a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b : an unproved assumption"
In fact Darwinists hate having to recognize evolution as only a theory so much that they are fighting another battle to keep stickers off of text books that remind students of this in Cobb County Ga. The stickers read simple (and correctly) "This textbook contains material on evolution. 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."
But we cannot have that either! And the reason is because Darwinism or the "Origin of the Species" fails one critical test. That critical test is there is no starting point.
Most arguments with an evolutionist break down as you walk them back through their theory.
"Where did life currently on Earth come from?"
Darwinist: " It evolved from species that previously existed."
"Do you have evidence of this?"
Darwinist (if he/she is honest): "Not hard evidence but we have a fossil record from which can suppose this. Yes there are many anomalies evolution doesn't account for and yes we don't have 'intermediate' species but it works in theory."
"Fair enough. So where did those species that previously existed come from?"
Darwinist: "They evolved from a common ancestor."
"And the 'common ancestor' came from?"
Darwinist: "It formed chemically and spontaneously through chemistry in the primordial ooze."
"And the primordial ooze came from?"
Darwinist: "It formed after billions of years and after the Big Bang."
"And what is the 'Big Bang'?"
Darwinist: "A super dense ball of matter exploded creating all the matter that currently exists."
"And where did this super dense ball come from?"
Darwinist: "Uh ... um ... huh. Well I guess that it had just always existed or was created out of nothing."
Please note the last line of that. It either always existed or it was created out of nothing. Sound familiar? It should because it is basically the same starting point you have with recognized religions like Christianity and so on. You cannot prove it. You simply accept it as faith. God has always existed and he created the universe out of "nothing".
So what separates Darwinism from concepts such as Intelligent Design? The answer is the guise of "science". The same guise that made people think for years that the sun revolved around the Earth and that the Earth was flat for that matter.
Listen. I have always been candid about my beliefs when it comes to "evolution". This belief has always been that I have little doubt that macro-evolution of some form does exist even though it has never been proven. At the same time macro-evolution like all other phenomena follow the rules of science even if we have not discovered those rules to date. And all the rules of science were created when a being that we know as God formed the Universe. God doesn't break these rules because He doesn't have to because He created them and allowed for the ultimate scientific principle known as His Word to supercede all other laws.
I believe that evolution exists because it is part of Intelligent Design. And Intelligent Design simply states that there is an Intelligence that guides the way the laws of nature happen. It doesn't mean "creationism" although many have tried to make it mean such. It simply means that there is something smarter than we controlling the way things work.
And to many people that is a scary thing. Even to many Christians and people of other faiths that should believe the same thing but in slightly different ways.
But try to step away from the accepted principle of Darwinism as the state sponsored religion and there will be Hell to pay until communities and families reclaim their schools and their children.
J.J. Jackson is the owner and Lead Editor of American Conservative Politics - The Land of the Free http://www.thelandofthefree.net/ and American Conservative Daily http://www.americanconservativedaily.com/. He is also the owner of American Infidel T-shirts http://www.cafepress.com/americaneagle04).