Creationism is an essential part of an argument that leads to control. It supplies us with

---
Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

Creationism is an essential part of an argument that leads to control. It supplies us with the premise "God made us. So He meant for us to do bla bla bla...". Creationism is essential to the argument you hear from Christian moralists who say "Do as I say, Because it says so in the Bible and because God made us to obey His Law (Interpeted by me and through the authority vested in me as a True Believer in Him)." The logic is that "IF you believe, as I have told you, that God made you for a purpose which is to fulfill his laws, which I will inperpet to you and tell you how to live them, then you must trust in me", and sometimes "Only in me." And "Don't believe in that Evolution crap, we have this 'scientific' theory that is better. ( That atheistic idea that man was not made by God directly to fulfill His laws, will lead to moral decay, loss of control and chaos)." >If the second, I would be impressed if you could demonstrate that there is a >causual relationship between a desire to control others and belief in >Creationism. "Science is Religion, because both are based on faith." "Evolution is ONLY a theory. (I have Absolute Knowledge)" "I will tell you what to think. Because science cannot answer questions finally. I have the final answer and here it is: God Created us for a purpose we dare not question and anyone who does question this is a Satanist. Only True Christians will be saved and I know how you will be saved. Trust in me, alone." >> The approach is frankly political and the members of >>certian Christian and related sects in the U.S. are dangerous because >>their reading of the religious tradition is too political. > > Whoops, hold on here. I agree that Creationism is a goofy >attempt at self-deception, but nobody can be considered too >political here in the US. You see, thanks to that little >thing called "Democracy" anybody who want's to get involved >in politics can, even if their ideas are dumb. I am not saying that their free speech needes to be curbed, but their fund raising, and therefore their clout with tax-free funds does need to be curbed in a way that the rest of us have restrictions on how we can use money to buy into the political processes. Any church activities that are not related to maintainence of a place of worship or a cherity should be subject to taxation and money spent on political campaigns should be regualted according to the laws that govern business and the welathy. > I will support you in any argument against their ideas, >but I will firmly defend their right to be involved in politics. >If you start denying peoples rights to do this, what is to stop >them from doing the same to you? I think you misinterpeted what I meant. I meant that they should pay taxes for activities that are political and not enjoy the current status of being largely tax exempt. There is a compro- mise working in our history. Churches got some breaks povided that they didn't get too powerful politically. By that I mean that there has been an understanding that chruch properties would not be taxed if the churches didn't use their wealth to gain an unfair political advantage. That is changing. There is alot of money, much of it gotten tax-free, and there is alot of influience for interests that are numerically small, but disporportionately powerful because of untaxed assets. The political establishment will eventually see this discrepancy and begin to curb the influience of this money, probably through taxation. >> These are >>the same people who have taken over the Republican Party, the likes >>of the Christian Coelition. Creationism is but a small part of >>a larger reactionary movement centered on Christian rhetoric. > > Well, don't vote for them. That's what the constitution's all about(*). I think that some of these people would suspend the Constitution if they had a chance. Extremists will enjoy constitutional protections until they are powerful then they would turn and undermine these. You have to remember that some of these reactionaries are theocratic and would not only set up their religion as established but would move to restrict those who disagree with them. Usually the idealistic and utopian sects form enclaves and isolate themselves from the outside. It would take a full blown 1930's style collapse to percipitate the Christian reactionary takeover a la "It Can't Happen Here", by Lewis. > (*) Okay, not all, but I assume you're intelligent enough to get the point. The Republican Party is a pretty major U.S. Institution to possibly be taken over by a Christian Reactionary element. Maybe that means the death knell of the GOP. Hopefully the moderates will take over the show in the next election year when the ultra-Conservatives play out. Then again if we cede Orange and San Diago Counties to Mexico and let a neo-Inquisition take over there and clean house on all those crackpot Protestants and Mormons...... :-) :-) Bruce Salem

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank