A friend stumbles onto the true meaning of Darwin and Darwin Day in today’s society when he writes to ask,
Why don’t they split the difference and call it “Darwin and Wallace Day”? They did that with “President’s Day.”
(He notes that the birthdays of Darwin and Wallace (April 14) are a little further apart than those of US presidents Lincoln and Washington, but still … .)
He is thinking, perhaps, of: Why is there a Darwin Day but no Newton Day? Never mind no Wallace Day. Okay, here’s the News desk’s response:
Actually, they couldn’t add Wallace.
If they called it Darwin and Wallace Day, it would really be about evolution.
It wouldn’t be just another atheist and co-dependent liberal Christian sausage festival that some now attempt to impose on the public as a national holiday.
What makes Wallace deadly is that he really, truly, is about evolution and only about evolution. Not about promoting new atheism.
It would be like proposing a Lynn Margulis and Barbara McClintock day. Great ladies, immense achievements, no help to Darwinian atheism in the long run.
Few really care about evolution except insofar as it enables the public promotion of naturalist atheism and eat-me-last theism.
Look, Darwin was different.
He wanted to promote naturalist atheism while remaining safe on the sidelines. We’re told Victorian journalist Thomas Huxley doubted Darwin’s theory but went ahead and promoted it anyway, to advance the cause. (See World of Life.)
It is astonishing to hear liberal Christian reverends talk as if there is any compatibility whatever between popular Darwinism and Christianity. And then there is BioLogos (Christians for Darwin).
Check out their founder Francis Collins here. Much as I dislike Christians for Darwin, I would not wish such a founder on them, or on any allegedly Christian cause.
Note: Wallace Day is celebrated, but without the coercive hooplah or pursuit of public funding.
See also: John West has updated Darwin Day in America (read free excerpt!)
Follow UD News at Twitter!