evolution

Barton Blames Theory of Evolution for State-Level Separation of Church and State

Submitted by Brian Tashman on January 17, 2012 - 2:10pm

On Monday, Janet Parshall hosted David Barton to use Martin Luther King Jr. Day as an opportunity for Barton to spew his right-wing reading of U.S. history and the Constitution. While Barton does not have degrees in history or law, he claimed that the theory of evolution was responsible for the Supreme Court’s ruling in Everson v. Board of Education, which found that the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause applies to the states because it was incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment — because it led to legal positivism.

As Barton explains, law students who learned about the theory of evolution, which he objects to since he believes the Founders settled “the entire debate on creation and evolution” and opposed the theory, consequently believed that the Constitution should evolve, and in turn made the Establishment Clause apply to the states. Barton has consistently opposed the Supreme Court’s definition of the Establishment Clause and its application to states and localities, even going as so far to tell Jon Stewart that he believes cities can even implement Sharia law, although he later denied saying it.

Barton: This may sound weird but it was the theory of evolution, we think it’s a science debate it is not, if you apply the theory of evolution to law you say, ‘wait a minute we can’t be bound by a two hundred year old document, we’ve evolved past that, what we need to have is an evolving document that meets the needs of society today and who best to evolve the document but judges, they’re the ones who deal with the law,’ so we got into this thing of what’s called legal positivism or evolutionary law, living constitution, and we started teaching that in the law schools in the 1920s. Take kids in the law schools in the 20s and, get this, they’re now in legal practice in the ’30s and now in the ’40s they’re adults with twenty years under their belt and they get appointed to the US Supreme Court and so in ’47 they simply implemented what they’ve been taught in law school twenty-five years earlier.

Brian Tashman's blog

PFAW

Filed under:

Santorum Calls For Public Schools To Undermine The Teaching Of Evolution

Submitted by Brian Tashman on November 29, 2011 - 5:15pm

During a meeting with the editorial board of the Nashua Telegraph, Rick Santorum urged public schools to begin teaching claims that undermine evolution, no matter their scientific veracity. He blamed “the left and the scientific community, so to speak,” for the inability of schools to teach about the role of God or a Creator, and said that “maybe the science points to the fact that maybe science doesn’t explain all these things.”

Such attacks on the teaching of evolution are nothing new from Santorum, who attached language in the Conference Report of the No Child Left Behind Act that says a “quality science education” include topics that challenge biological evolution as part of his “teaching the controversy” campaign. He also endorsed the Dover, Pennsylvania school district’s requirement that teachers offer textbooks on “Intelligent Design,” which was developed by proponents of Creationism, and the teaching of “Intelligent Design” was declared unconstitutional in Kitzmiller v. Dover. In fact, the “teach the controversy” approach originates from the anti-evolution Discovery Institute, and the National Center for Science Education points out that evolution “is not scientifically controversial, nor are resources for each side of comparable quality – evidence for evolution comes from peer-reviewed literature whereas evidence against evolution is built on flawed assumptions and popularized misconceptions.”

Watch:

Santorum: There are many on the left and in the scientific community, so to speak, who are afraid of that discussion because oh my goodness you might mention the word, God-forbid, “God” in the classroom, or “Creator,” or that there may be some things that are inexplainable by nature where there may be, where it’s better explained by a Creator, of course we can’t have that discussion. It’s very interesting that you have a situation that science will only allow things in the classroom that are consistent with a non-Creator idea of how we got here, as if somehow or another that’s scientific. Well maybe the science points to the fact that maybe science doesn’t explain all these things. And if it does point to that, why don’t you pursue that? But you can’t because it’s not science, but if science is pointing you there how can you say it’s not science? It’s worth the debate.

Brian Tashman's blog

PFAW

Filed under:

Barton: Founding Fathers Were Against Teaching Evolution; Revolution Was Fought To End Slavery

Submitted by Brian Tashman on June 8, 2011 - 1:19pm

Pseudo-historian David Barton visited the Christian television program Celebration on the Daystar Television Network with host Jodi Lamb on Monday to discuss his right-wing, pro-GOP view of American history.

Barton, who says that the Founding Fathers like Ben Franklin opposed Net Neutrality, claims he also knows the views of the Founding Fathers in the debate over whether schools should teach Creationism alongside evolution in public schools. Naturally, Barton says that the Founding Fathers “already had the entire debate on creation and evolution,” and sided with Creationism. Of course, Charles Darwin wrote On The Origin of Species in 1859 andThe Descent of Man in 1871 – but apparently the Founding Fathers knew about evolution science:

Barton continues to lash out at “deconstructionism” in the education system for distorting the truth about the Founding Fathers, arguing that the Founding Fathers did not support slavery or engage in the practice themselves. While Founding Fathers like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Patrick Henry were all slaveholders, Barton has created his own theory of the cause of the American Revolution: the Founding Fathers’ desire to reject the British Empire’s endorsement of slavery. “That’s why we said we want to separate from Britain, so we can end slavery,” Barton said:

He concluded his talk by saying “I want to see Christians take over the Democrat Party, I want to see Christians take over the Republican Party, I want to have a fight for who has the more Biblical candidate.” Barton, a proponent of Seven Mountains Dominionism, called on people “to move the most Godly candidate through” both parties:

Brian Tashman's blog

PFAW

Filed under:

Creation Museum May Rebuild Solomon's Temple

Submitted by Brian Tashman on March 31, 2011 - 3:47pm

Solomon’s Temple was destroyed in 587 BCE by Nebuchadnezzar II, and the Second Temple was razed in 70 CE by the Romans. Now, the Creation Museum of Petersburg, Kentucky is weighing a plan to rebuild the Temple after it finishes construction of Noah’s Ark and the Tower of Babel (with taxpayer funding). The Creation Museum is run by the anti-evolution group Answers in Genesis, whose leader Ken Ham recently found himself fighting with other creationists after he fiercely criticized a fellow creationist speaker. Mark Looy, the cofounder of Answers in Genesis, told a giddy Matt Friedeman of American Family Radio that the Creation Museum is considering plans to reproduce the Temple. “We’ve been thinking about that,” Looy said, “but it’s not going to be some kind of secular temple where all sorts of weird religious ceremonies are held.”

Brian Tashman's blog

PFAW

Filed under:

National Lampoon's Creationist Vacation: Book Your Trip Today!

Submitted by Josh Glasstetter on February 26, 2009 - 4:29pm

It’s almost March and you haven’t made your Spring Break travel plans, have you? Well not to worry, the Creation Studies Institute can help:

If you’ve never been on an Ice Age Fossil Adventure, it apparently looks like this (judging from the brochure we received in the mail):

In between wooly mammoth sightings, you’ll stand around in a river and learn “how to collect and interpret Florida fossils using a biblical framework.” Just imagine the shock and wonder on your children’s faces when they learn, according to CSI, that fossils prove the world is only 6,000 years old:

Even though this is an oversimplification and there are anomalies in the fossil record, the lack of intermediates in the fossil record and the abrupt appearance of virtually every major living creature, fully formed in the fossil record confirm the record of the Word of God recorded in the book of Genesis.

While an evolutionist looks at this evidence and sees a slow progression of life morphing itself into other, higher forms of life, the Creationist sees exactly what would be expected as a result of a worldwide cataclysmic flood such as the Flood recorded in the days of Noah.

The Ice Age Fossil Adventure is happening this March and April, and there’s still time to book the family adventure of a lifetime!

But sorry ladies! You'll have to work on your tan somewhere else:

Have fun, and be careful out there:

Josh Glasstetter's blog

PFAW

Filed under:

Virginia GOP Chair goes all Cro-Magnon on Darwin, on his birthday

Submitted by Josh Glasstetter on February 13, 2009 - 12:15pm

Yesterday was the birthday of Lincoln and Darwin, and Virginia GOP chairman Jeff Frederick couldn't pass up the opportunity to go all Cro-Magnon on the father of modern biology.

Frederick obviously put a lot of thought into his assault on evolution and created a foolproof (or so it seemed) plan -- put Darwin up alongside Lincoln and let the people see Darwin for the monster he was.

First he talked about Lincoln; it went haltingly but we got his point:

"Abraham Lincoln is best know (sic), as you all well know, for freeing the slaves by issuing the Emancipation Proclamation affirming in his Gettyburg (sic) Address in 19, I'm sorry, 1863..."

Then on to that bad, bad man:

"Darwin however is best known for the theory of evolution, arguing that men are not only, quote, are only, not, not created, but they are not equal, as some are more evolved... Darwin's theory was used by atheists to explain away the belief in God."

I can only imagine what this guy has up his sleeve for Galileo's birthday, but it's really a shame that Frederick knows so little, perhaps nothing, about the man he's attacking.

He could have learned a lot from this recent piece marking Darwin's bicentennial:

"While many of his contemporaries approved of slavery, Darwin did not. He came from a family of ardent abolitionists, and he was revolted by what he saw in slave countries[.] 'It makes one’s blood boil, yet heart tremble, to think that we Englishmen and our American descendants, with their boastful cry of liberty, have been and are so guilty.'"

But anyone who's familiar with Frederick knows that this kind of thing is par for the course -- Karen Tumulty captured him in his element last fall:

He climbed atop a folding chair to give 30 campaign volunteers who were about to go canvassing door to door their talking points — for instance, the connection between Barack Obama and Osama bin Laden: "Both have friends that bombed the Pentagon," he said. "That is scary." [...] "And he won't salute the flag," one woman added, repeating another myth about Obama. She was quickly topped by a man who called out, "We don't even know where Senator Obama was really born."

It's pretty clear in which direction Frederick is taking the Virginia GOP. No wonder the party has continued to lose ground under his tenure.

But maybe I'm being too hard on Frederick. He is after all facing a strong challenge to his chairmanship from this gentleman: