Double Standards

When an evolutionist talks about faith, it’s no bog deal to most.  No, strike that, it’s cause for celebration, because we must show how evolution can lead you to strengthen your spirituality.

Evolution, he said, “doesn’t in any way put the tradition down” but is “like a container that holds all these other stories and shows why they all make sense.”

Evolution shows why our respective faiths make sense?  How is a science supposed to do that?

“I have a closer walk with God, I have a deeper appreciation for the Scriptures…”

Imagine if an ID science advocate were to say the same thing, that person would be denounced as a religious fanatic that is only out to destroy science.  This is a blatant double standard where it has become OK for evolutionists to be spiritual and talk about how their faith is strengthened by evolution (like Dawkins does) but there’s hell to pay if anyone else says the same thing.  In fact, if any ID advocate says the same thing, evolutionists feel justified in tarring all ID advocates with the same brush.


4 responses to “Double Standards

  1. Yes it’s just amazing. Any scientific reasoning/evidence that points toward atheism is considered “scientific” and the “scientific” case for atheism can be shouted from the rooftops with no career consequences, even if it takes the form of a bigoted diatribe. In addition all kinds of (anti)theological points can be made. On the other hand, any scientific reasoning/evidence that points toward theism is considered “religious”, and there are real consequences for speaking up about it. And heaven help you if you answer an atheist’s theological argument with a theological answer. They can theologically pontificate about the existence of evil, and hurl venom-filled insults at believers, but heaven help you if you politely give the theological reply that the world is fallen, or that it is not some kind of a shock to believers that the world is seriously messed up. Heads they win, tails you lose.

  2. professorsmith

    Yes, the double standard is quite obvious to those whose views are not colored by the prevailing theology of academia. I hope that someday we can all be free to believe what we want, to pursue academic topics that today are taboo, and to not have to cover our identities for fear of reprisal.

  3. Oleg Tchernyshyov

    “The prevailing theology of academia?” LOL!

    professorsmith, I am a faculty member in a science department and I can recall only one conversation with a colleague of mine over the last two years (!) when the subjects of religion, evolution and design came up. And that one I initiated myself: my colleagues don’t pay much attention to the subject of evolution. (And yes, some of them are Christians.) What theology of academia are you talking about? Where is our weekly theological surmon? I feel robbed!

  4. professorsmith

    The theology of materialism. I think you know exactly what I’m talking about and you are being obtuse in order to hide it. It’s a useless ploy on your part, however, considering quite a few of us are in on the secret.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s