Date: Sat Feb 28 2009 - 10:58:01 EST
I essentially agree with campolo's conclusion, even if some may quibble with
some aspects of his views of darwin per se. Human beings are unique in a
mysterious way, whatever physical processes underlie our development., and
no theory of biological origins justifies racism. Why should these
propositions be controversial for us?
David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <dopderbeck@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 10:15 AM
Subject: Re: [asa] Campolo gets it wrong
To: Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
I essentially agree with campolo's conclusion, even if some may quibble with
some aspects of his views of darwin per se. Human beings are unique in a
mysterious way, whatever physical processes underlie our development., and
no theory of biological origins justifies racism. Why should these
propositions be controversial for us?
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
------------------------------
*From*: "Michael Roberts"
*Date*: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 07:42:06 -0000
*To*: <asa@calvin.edu>
*Subject*: [asa] Campolo gets it wrong
Something from Christian Today. .
It seems Campolo does not understand Darwin at all
What’s wrong with Darwinism?by Tony Campolo
Posted: Friday, February 27, 2009, 12:45 (GMT)
Font Scale:A A A
[image: What’s wrong with Darwinism?]
[image: Enlarge this picture] Enlarge this picture
Tony Campolo
Many supporters of the principle of separation of church and state say that
the Intelligent Design Theory of creation ought not to be taught in public
schools because that it contains a religious bias.
They say that Intelligent Design proponents suggest that the evolutionary
development of life was not the result of natural selection, as Charles
Darwin suggested, but was somehow given purposeful direction and, by
implication, was guided by God.
Arguing in favour of what they believe is a non-prejudicial science, they
contend that children in public schools ought to be taught Darwin’s
explanation of how the human race evolved, which they claim is value-free
and dependent solely on scientific evidence. *Nothing could be further from
the truth!*
In reality, Darwin’s writings, when actually read, express the prevalent
racism of the nineteenth century, and endorse an extreme laissez faire
political ideology that legitimates the neglect of the suffering poor by the
ruling elite.
Those who argue at school board meetings that Darwin should be taught in
public schools seldom have taken the time to read what he had to say. If
they even knew the full title of his book, which is *On the Origin of
Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races
in the Struggle for Life*, they might have gained some inkling of the racism
propagated by this controversial theorist.
Then, if they had gone on to read his second book, *The Descent of Man*, it
is likely that they would be shocked to learn that among Darwin’s
scientifically based proposals was the elimination of “the negro and
Australian peoples,” which he considered to be savage races whose continued
survival was hindering the progress of civilisation.
In *The Descent of Man *(1871), Darwin went so far as to rank races in terms
of what he believed was their nearness and likeness to gorillas. He further
proposed the extermination of those races which he “scientifically” defined
as inferior. To not do so, he claimed, would result in those races, which
have much higher birth rates than his designated superior races, exhausting
the resources needed for the survival of better people, and eventually
dragging down all of civilization.
Darwin even argued against advanced societies wasting time and money on
caring for those who are insane, or suffer from birth defects. To him, these
unfit members of our species ought not to survive.
In case you think that Darwin sounds like a Nazi, you are not far from the
truth. Konrad Lorenz, a biologist who provided much of the propaganda for
the Nazi party, made Darwin’s theories the basis for his polemics. The
Pulitzer Prize winner, Marilynne Robinson, in her insightful essay on
Darwin, points out that the German nationalist writer, Heinrich von
Treitschke, and the biologist, Ernst Haeckel, also drew on Darwin’s writings
as they helped Hitler develop those racist ideas that led to the Holocaust.
Those creationists who fear Darwin because his theories contradict their
literal Biblical belief that creation occurred in six 24-hour days, do not
get at the real dangers of Darwinism. They do not realise that an
explanation of the development of biological organisms over eons of time
really does not pose the great threat to the dignity of our humanity that
they suppose. Instead, they, along with the rest of us, should really fear
the ethical implications of Darwinism.
I hope that in school our children will be taught that it is up to science
to study the processes that gave birth to the human race. But, as postmodern
as it may be, I also want them to learn that whatever science discovers
about our biological origins, there is, nevertheless, a mystical quality in
human beings that makes each of us sacred and of infinite worth.
Personally, I hold to the belief that, regardless of how we got here, we
should recognise that there is an infinite qualitative difference between
the most highly developed ape and each and every human being. Darwin never
recognised this disjuncture. And that is why his theories are dangerous.
*Tony Campolo is Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Eastern University and
served as pastoral counsellor to former President Bill Clinton.*
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
