Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

(Culture War) The Final Rout of the Left Has Begun

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

South Dakota just passed a law making abortion a felony except in case of medical emergency. It’s now just a matter for the governor to sign it which everyone expects him to do. The law is designed to force the Supreme Court to reconsider Roe v. Wade. The present Supreme Court is unlikely to hold up Roe v. Wade which is based on a made up out of whole cloth (mythical) constitutional guarantee of privacy. It will become again a matter for states to decide for themselves. This is as it should be. A bunch of politicians or judges in Washington have no business defining the moral standards that the good and free people of South Dakota or any other state must live with. Legislated moral values not explicitely enumerated in the constitution are simply something the federal government has no business dictating to the states.

This is the eventual path that ID in public schools will take – each state will decide for itself. I almost feel sorry for the vocal minority that refuses to allow a school board to insist that students be informed that evolution is a theory, not a fact, and as such should be carefully studied and critically considered. In so doing they’ve allowed us to frame them as atheist zealots out to censor any interpretation of empirical data that doesn’t conform to an atheist worldview. Framed in that manner a vast majority is alienated. Now they’re discovering to their elitist academic intellectual chagrin that they live in a democracy. The NCSE’s desperate push to recruit churches onto their side is a real knee slapper as Pim Van Meurs’ headline shrieks US Scientists enlist clergy in evolution battle. That’s just SO hilarious. 🙂

In the culture wars, there’s no doubt that NeoDarwinian evolution is a rallying point for the liberal left and ID is a rallying point with the conservative right. It’s also amusing that Panda’s Thumb author Reed Cartwright announced PT’s nomination for best community award without mentioning in the headline it’s the Koufax Award which only goes to websites promoting “progressive politics” which of course is code for the politics of the liberal left. It’s named the Koufax Award after Sandy Koufax the famous LEFT-handed baseball pitcher. Is Reed trying to make the nomination out to be more than it is or is he trying to bury the fact that NeoDarwinian evolution is a rallying point for the leftists?

As I’ve been saying on blogs for over a year now, the only thing propping up the NeoDarwinian fairy tale today is judicial fiat and that last leg is about to be kicked out from under it. ID will be presented alongside RM+NS and the two will have to compete in the open on a level playing field for the hearts and minds of a new generation. All of us here I think are quite comfortable letting ID and RM+NS compete on a level playing field. That’s because we understand that ID is a strong idea able to compete and win. The NeoDarwinian dogmatists also understand that ID is a strong idea able to compete and win which is why they desperately oppose even mentioning its name to a student. I sometimes wonder if they realize how transparent they are.

Comments

But its okay for the states to legislate moral values? Making abortion legal is not legislating moral values but making it illegal is. I for one hate the idea of abortion and consider it a black and white issue the vast majority of the time. That said I do not think it right to impose my morals on others. Obviously the issue turns on your conception of the sanctity of human life and just when that life is "human."

Most laws are the imposition of someone's morals on themselves and others. That's life. Get used to it. -ds ftrp11
February 23, 2006
February
02
Feb
23
23
2006
01:48 PM
1
01
48
PM
PDT

"As I’ve been saying on blogs for over a year now, the only thing propping up the NeoDarwinian fairy tale today is judicial fiat and that last leg is about to be kicked out from under it."

I'm sorry - are you seriously suggesting that the only reason the vaaaaaaaaaaaaaast majority of scientists are quite happy with the theory of evolution as the best current explnation of the diversity of life is because judges told them they had to believe that? Even if ID was miraculously (no pun intended) allowed into schools (by a judge, court, whatever), do you really, honestly think that scientists would suddenly drop what they're doing and approach science completely differently?

Excuse me if I am incorrect, but my undertsanding was that the Scopes trial and the Dover trial were the two major court cases dealing with evolution in the classroom in the last century. Since Dover only happened a few months ago, was the Scopes trial the one that "NeoDarwinian fairy tales" were propped up on?

Scientists are a tiny part of the population. They have failed miserably to convince a significant number of people that the NeoDarwinian story is true. The only thing left propping it up is that it enjoys legally enforced exclusivity in public schools. Judicial fiat is the only thing maintaining its exclusivity. If you think it's so robust why not let it be taught? Surely no one will believe anything else. What are you so afraid of? -ds dazza
February 23, 2006
February
02
Feb
23
23
2006
01:40 PM
1
01
40
PM
PDT
"They have made their case as well as it can be made, and people still don’t buy it" Even more so, they have made their case without giving these people access to other ideas, while leaving out all of the tough stuff. Usually, when only one side gets to present an argument, and they know they can do so without a retort from the other side, it is pretty clear which one wins. But in this case, even without having the opposing view taught, they are still losing. I think I've asked this before -- what is it that happens to people in academia that causes them to lose all ability to think rationally?johnnyb
February 23, 2006
February
02
Feb
23
23
2006
01:14 PM
1
01
14
PM
PDT
Darwinists are constantly lamenting the fact that the vast majority of people don’t buy their unguided, unplanned, purely materialistic narrative about the origin of life and its historical development. They often claim that they must not have made their case well enough, and that America’s students just aren’t well enough educated about Darwinism. They have made their case as well as it can be made, and people still don’t buy it, not because they are not well enough educated, but because they have more sense than they are given credit for. Darwinists have had a complete monopoly in public education for more than half a century, and they haven’t changed very many minds. They fear ID with a passion, and for obvious reasons -- they know they will lose on that level playing field.GilDodgen
February 23, 2006
February
02
Feb
23
23
2006
12:52 PM
12
12
52
PM
PDT

"The present Supreme Court is unlikely to hold up Roe v. Wade which is based on a made up out of whole cloth (mythical) constitutional guarantee of privacy. It will become again a matter for states to decide for themselves."

This is simply not true. Roe was firmly 6-3 before O'Connor and Rehnquist left, which only changes one vote if both Roberts and Alito vote to undermine Roe. As all the legal commentators, left and right, recognize, Roe is not currently in danger (unfortunately). It's 5-4 for Roe. What is in danger is Stenberg and Partial Birth Abortion, which Justice Kennedy will vote to cut back on (as he did in Stenberg).

Your point still stands about states being able to decide for themselves should Roe be overturned, but it's just not going to be overturned until there are additional changes in the Justices.

You're about 20 years out of date. Roe v. Wade was last reconsidered by SCOTUS in 1992 in Planned Parenthood v. Casey where it was upheld by a 5-4 decision and came within a hair's breadth of being overtuned as Justice Kennedy changed his vote at the last possible instant. If it's reconsidered by the Roberts court it will likely be overturned by a 5-4 vote as O'Connor's vote to uphold will be replaced by Alito's vote to overturn. Hasta la vista, Roe. -ds mfrancisco
February 23, 2006
February
02
Feb
23
23
2006
12:08 PM
12
12
08
PM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply