Intelligent Design vs. Evolution

Intelligent Design vs. Evolution

aka

(Creationism) vs. Evolution

aka

The Constitution vs. The Christian Right

Or as Bill O’Reilly would have you believe;

The Secular Progressive Elitist Press vs. All good Reasonable Christian Peoples

Can I get an Oy Vey!

Today a judge in Pennsylvania ruled that teaching creationism would violate the Constitutional separation of church and State. Well duh! Of course it violates the separation of church and State. I am a person of faith. I believe in a higher power, G-d, something greater than ourselves. I also believe in an evolving global/universal ecology based on Einstein and Darwin’s theories. I believe scientific theories should be taught in schools. I believe that religious theories should be taught in the home or in church/synagogue/mosque etc. Or, if you want your children to be taught both sides in school, send them to private religious schools. I have no problem with both sides of coin being taught in religious schools, but religion has no place in democratic/representative government or public education.

They say, “No1!!! You can’t do that!! That’s not possible!!! How can you do that it goes against both theories?!? You heretic!!”

I say, “Bite me… Or, you can listen to what I have to say and either agree or disagree with me.”

Let’s briefly (extremely briefly) define both theories for the purposes of the hypothesis I lay before you.

Creationism, Judeo-Christian origin, as told in the Old Testament, Genesis, G-d created the heaven and the Earth and on the seventh day he rested.

Big Bang/Evolution, infinitely dense singularity in space explodes into an expanding universe. As our sun and earth cool organisms evolve out of some primordial ooze, leading to multi-celled organisms, leading to, leading to, leading to…

Clear? No? Well, me either, but let me try and reconcile the two for you without going into Talmudic commentary or the Vatican Archives.

You have to lose all presumption of the divine. What does this mean? It means you have to reject the possibility that you can understand G-d’s time table versus human perception. If you have a literal interpretation of the bible I just lost you. However, if you don’t, if you think that human understanding is greater now than it has ever been you have to accept the fact that biblical texts may not mean exactly what they did to those who lived when they were written. If the bible was revealed to Moses on Sinai is it reasonable to postulate that G-d, while giving an explanation of things, spoke generically and relatively simply to Moses? I think it is. Is reasonable to presume that we have a true understanding of time as G-d understands? I don’t think so. Therefore, the seven day creation period described in Genesis could very well have taken millions of years as humans understand them. That fits Big Bang/Evolution into Creationism.

Let me see if I can get the scientists to a place where they have to admit that some things are beyond scientific understanding. The Big Bang postulates that an infinitely dense singularity of space and matter exploded at a finite point in time to create our expanding universe as we know it today. My question to you is this; Where did that infinitely dense singularity come from? The answer, obviously, is you don’t know. I don’t know, no one knows where it came from. Therefore, you cannot reject the existence of G-d or a higher intelligence that created that singularity. That my friends, fits Creationism into Big Bang/Evolution.

For those who take the bible word for word literally. I give you the words of the great Aaron Sorkin, from an episode of the West Wing:

President Bartlet (sarcastically): I like how you call homosexuality an abombination.
Jenna Jacobs: I don't say homosexuality is an abomination, Mr. President, the Bible does.
President Bartlet: Yes, it does. Leviticus.
Jenna Jacobs: 18:22.
President Bartlet: Chapter and verse. I wanted to ask you a couple of questions while I have you here. I'm interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She's a Georgetown sophmore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleared the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be? While thinking about that, can I ask another? My Chief of Staff Leo McGarry insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself or is it okay to call the police? Here's one that's really important because we've got a lot of sports fans in this town: touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean. Leviticus 11:7. If they promise to wear gloves, can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point? Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads? "Think about that, will you? Oh, and one last thing. You may have mistaken this for your meeting of the ignorant tight-asses club, but in this building when the President stands no one sits."

___________________________________________________

Can’t we agree at this point that literal interpretations of the bible lead to unreasonable behavior by today’s standards and it is only through reason and acceptance of more than one idea that we will have a comprehensive understanding of one another and further advance as a global society?

No matter what you believe though, The Constitution is clear that church and state shall be separate entities and no religious ideology shall be imposed by government institution. Debates like that belong in homes, in the news, in places of worship and here, in the blogosphere, where all minds can be free to express their ideas and be heard.

No1ofConsequence