Re: [asa] Creationists for genocide

From: Jack Haas <haas.john@comcast.net>
Date: Sat Aug 25 2007 - 11:45:21 EDT

I join with Wayne in urging caution when recording individuals as
defenders of genocide, etc.
There is quite a difference between Craig's discussion of "God"
commanding the Jewish people
to slaughter pagan inhabitants in the promised land and 20 and 21 C
examples of individuals
directing such acts.

Jack Haas

dawsonzhu@aol.com wrote:
>
> pvm.pandas@gmail.com <mailto:pvm.pandas@gmail.com> quoted:
>
> <
> Aside from exposing the historical flaws found in the work of Weikart,
> this essay demonstrates that the defense of genocide, infanticide and
> "eugenics" by creationists actually has a very venerable and lengthy
> tradition that precedes Darwin. In fact, the most blatant defenses of
> genocide ever penned are still to be found among creationists. Some of
> these defenders of genocide include Reuben A. Torrey, the famed
> fundamentalist apologist, William Lane Craig, Jonathan Sarfati, an
> Australian Young-Earth creationist with a Ph.D. in chemistry, and
> Glenn Miller, an American business executive who fancies himself to be
> a biblical scholar.[2]
> >
>
> Don't you think this is really pushing it? I grant that
> Sarfati purports the truth while twisting and bending science
> beyond recognition to do so. But these sorts of statements take
> a dive in an equally unbecoming direction.
> While I firmly disagree with the creationist' view of how to
> read Gen 1-11, among the people I know, I would take the
> average creationist to believe that stuff because they need
> it to prop up their faith. They feel if they give in, the
> scripture and its revealed truth will slide down the slippery
> slope, and the word of God will lose its meaning. I would think
> it is a defensive response to the encroachment of science.
> There is a sense that the moral views revealed in scripture
> transcend evolution. Science cannot make moral judgments.
> The most it can say is that a large genetic diversity
> insures a larger population from which to select fit
> individuals. But again, then we ask "what is 'fit'". Well,
> it is probably what is 'fit' for the time. And what is that?
> Well, I reckon it is unlikely to be Nietzsche's Ubermensch
> (superman). Without a proper moral compass, all is but a
> paper tiger.
> by Grace we proceed,
> Wayne
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: PvM <pvm.pandas@gmail.com>
> To: AmericanScientificAffiliation <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 2:01 pm
> Subject: [asa] Creationists for genocide
>
> Professor Hector Avalos, Professor of Religious Studies at Iowa State
> University has recently finished "Creationists for genocide" which
> explores the link between ethics, the holocaust, Darwinism and Luther.
> An interesting reading with some challenging positions.
>
> <quote>
> One understands nothing about creationism unless one understands that
> it is meant to be a system of ethics. That is why the assault on
> evolution has always included a lengthy history of moral judgments
> against evolution. Perhaps none of these judgments has been more
> accusatory than the idea that Darwinism led to the Holocaust. Such an
> idea is trumpeted in many creationist venues, including books and
> blogs. A prime example of this accusation today is found in Richard
> Weikart's From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and
> Racism in Germany (2004).[1] Weikart is a member of the Discovery
> Institute who has devoted his career to elucidating the supposed
> immoral consequences of evolution.
>
> For Weikart, the materialistic basis of evolutionary theory is
> responsible for the devaluation of human life in general. In
> particular, the idea of the survival of the fittest leads to the
> devaluation or extermination of those considered "unfit" in society.
> Death becomes a good thing insofar as it helps the species rid itself
> of unfit organisms. The principal goal of all such anti-evolutionary
> moral arguments is to show that creationism, especially in its
> Judeo-Christian form, is a superior moral system.
>
> Aside from exposing the historical flaws found in the work of Weikart,
> this essay demonstrates that the defense of genocide, infanticide and
> "eugenics" by creationists actually has a very venerable and lengthy
> tradition that precedes Darwin. In fact, the most blatant defenses of
> genocide ever penned are still to be found among creationists. Some of
> these defenders of genocide include Reuben A. Torrey, the famed
> fundamentalist apologist, William Lane Craig, Jonathan Sarfati, an
> Australian Young-Earth creationist with a Ph.D. in chemistry, and
> Glenn Miller, an American business executive who fancies himself to be
> a biblical scholar.[2]
> </quote>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu <mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu> with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail
> <http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/index.htm?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000970>!

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Aug 25 11:46:01 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Aug 25 2007 - 11:46:01 EDT