Re: Biology, 2015 A.D.

Menton is a Missouri-Synod Lutheran who a few years ago wrote a cover story
in the _Lutheran Witness_, the official publication of the LC-MS, in which,
among other silly things, he had kind words for the apparent age claim. The
LC-MS is still quite conservative but with a change in administration has
downplayed such stuff. Apparently now Menton has found kindred spirits in
AiG.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
----- Original Message -----
From: <burgytwo@juno.com>
To: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2006 10:16 AM
Subject: Biology, 2015 A.D.

> Interesting link;
>
> http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2006/0102year2015.asp
>
> The text follows:
>
> The following article written by David Menton , Ph.D. (cell biology),
> Associate Professor (retired) of Anatomy at Washington University School
> of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri (1966-2000), is really a spoof on the
> current situation regarding the creation/evolution battle in the secular
> school system. However, at the same time, what Dr. Menton has written
> could become reality if the secularization of this culture continues. You
> may smile as you read this article-but be warned: much of what Dr. Menton
> portrays is only an extension of what is happening right now in this
> culture. We print this as a wake up call to God's people concerning the
> state of the nation and its future.
>
> Welcome to your federally mandated biology class-"The Evolution of You by
> Way of the Zoo." I am Miss Lead, I have a B.S. degree in "Evolutionary
> Indoctrination" and I will be your learning facilitator.
> I especially want to welcome you students who are new to our Federal
> schools. I know that this has been a trying year for many of you and your
> families, but as you know, the Supreme Court has declared that
> homeschooling and all explicitly Christian schools are prohibited by law
> and that you must now attend a federally controlled school. I thank you
> for your willing cooperation. It is regrettable that some children had to
> be forcibly taken away from their uncooperative parents, but the Court has
> decreed that it is the State, not the parents, who are primarily
> responsible for their education.
> It is required by law that we spend our first class period advising you of
> the legal rules and regulations governing both the definition of science
> and impermissible thoughts in the science classroom. As your facilitator,
> I myself must follow these regulations to remain on the federal payroll,
> and you must follow them to avoid being sent for mental deprogramming. So
> listen up! It is no fun having your memory banks reset to that of an
> artichoke.
> First we will consider the legally mandated definition of science: The
> Supreme Court has declared that "Science is the study of everything in the
> cosmos that is real and involves the effort to explain the origin of all
> real things in exclusively materialistic terms." The Court has defined the
> "cosmos" (i.e., material universe) in terms of Sagan's law-"The cosmos is
> all there is, all there ever was, and all there ever will be." Please note
> that the Court has left the entire realm of things that are unreal to the
> exclusive domain of the church. In this way that impregnable "wall of
> separation" between church and state, so wisely mandated by the framers of
> our Constitution, is not breached.
> Next we must consider the two laws of "Unthinkable Thought" which prohibit
> certain thoughts and speech in the science classroom. To enforce these
> laws, the courts require that all classroom instruction and discussion in
> science be recorded for analysis on videotape and that all teachers and
> students submit to lie detector questioning by Federal Thought Police.
> Those failing such tests will be given one more chance to abandon their
> unthinkable thoughts before being subjected to deprogramming.
> In the "First Law of Unthinkable Thought," the courts have declared that
> "no student or teacher will be permitted to think, much less articulate,
> any thought that dares to question the dictates of evolutionary dogma."
> While critical thinking and a questioning mind are essential to all fields
> of empirical science, such is not the case for evolutionism. The courts
> have found that atheists and "skeptics" never question the fact of
> evolution, while most criticisms of evolution, no matter how valid or
> scientific they might be, come from suspected "stealth" religionists and
> thus constitute the teaching of religion.
> The "Second Law of Unthinkable Thought" (best known as the
> "Anti-Intelligence law") declares that "no teacher or student will be
> permitted to think, much less articulate, any thought that something in
> nature is too complex and integrated to have been formed by random chance
> processes and to suggest instead that it reflects intelligent design or,
> God forbid, a divine Creator." Educators have found that most students
> tend to think of the possibility of intelligent design when teachers give
> insightful, substantive and enthusiastic lectures on complex biological
> systems. Thus the law now requires that biology teachers must give
> superficial and boring lectures laced with evolutionary speculation on
> organs such as the eye, lest students be led astray by their intuitive
> recognition of intelligent design.
> But why you might ask (but dare not) have the courts passed such draconian
> laws governing our very thoughts in the science classroom? The answer is
> really quite obvious. For years evolutionary dogma has been taught
> extensively in almost every class from first grade on, but surveys have
> shown that most students still fail to believe in evolutionism.
> Professional educators are amazed that even further increasing the
> quantity and intensity of evolutionary indoctrination has proven
> unsuccessful in producing true believers! Even worse, these unbelievers
> seem to have no difficulty in feeding back to us the required correct
> answers to evolutionary questions on examinations-indeed they seem to
> perform better than the true believers!
> Surely you can see that it was time for the courts to intervene and
> require actual belief in evolutionism and not just indoctrination. The
> very survival of America, indeed the survival of the world as we know it,
> depends on it! After all, Dobzhansky's law declares that "nothing in
> biology makes sense without evolution." If students do not truly believe
> in evolutionism, it is a proven fact that they will be totally incapable
> of pursuing any field requiring scientific understanding. Thus they will
> be completely unsuitable as teachers, researchers, physicians, nurses,
> engineers, geologists, astronomers, farmers, lawyers, parents, news
> reporters, talk show hosts and popular entertainers.
> Finally I will remind you that a federally mandated sticker known as the
> "revised Cobb County sticker" has been permanently affixed on the inside
> cover of your biology textbook declaring:
> "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a fact, not a
> theory, regarding the origin of living things. This material must be
> approached with a closed mind, studied superficially, and uncritically
> accepted."
> You are required by law to memorize this sticker and repeat it as a
> confession of faith before meals and each time you open and close the
> book.
> Rest assured that all these laws forbidding unthinkable thoughts and
> requiring unquestioning belief in crass materialism and evolutionism have
> received the enthusiastic support of almost all the professional
> educational, legal and human rights organizations as well as from
> distinguished people of faith from nearly all of the major Christian
> denominations and seminary schools. Now, if we are all willing to comply
> (and of course, you are), let's get started!
>
> Burgy
>
>
Received on Sun Jan 8 15:02:56 2006