Pat Robertson and I must not share the same God
Published 12:00 am Friday, November 25, 2005
A revolution took place last week in the small town of Dover, Penn.
Last year in Dover, the local school board voted to include “intelligent design” in the science curriculum.
This was yet another advance of the conservative Christian right, pushing ever farther into the educational and political environment with initiatives that represent a small minority of Americans who seek a theocratic state.
Last week, the citizens of Dover took back their schools, marking the beginning of the end for those who would insert one particular brand of Christianity into the public sphere. It will not be a pretty fight, but as surely as Pat Robertson is an embarrassment to any faith, this fight is now joined.
The long silent majority of Americans, of many faiths, has finally signaled that enough is enough. It is fitting that the stopping point is intelligent design.
Should anyone think the term intelligent design is anything other than an effort to substitute a religious explanation for a scientific theory, note only the comments from Robertson.
Pat basically suggested that God would get the good citizens of Dover for their actions. He further stated that Dover had, with this decision, cast God out of their community.
Of course, Pat has called for God's wrath in the past on New Orleans (gays) and Hugo Chavez.
Pat's God apparently is on call for death and dismemberment of Pat's enemies. Clearly, his reaction does represent the religious content of intelligent design, no matter how often its advocates have feigned the neutrality of this doctrine.
Like many Americans, I have no problem with intelligent design suggesting that the very complexity of our world suggests an organization greater that possible by random selection.
If one finds this supportive of the Biblical account of creation, then it would be a valuable way to describe the faith-based explanation of our presence on this small rock.
However, as a scientific explanation, intelligent design is useless. It is not a theory, lacking a hypothesis, empirical evidence, and a stream of later affirmation.
While there are gaps of knowledge in evolutionary theory, there are many links to its pattern of explanation. From a theological basis however, evolution needs not to be seen as conflicting with the Bible's teaching.
God may well have provided the spirit that is humankind, regardless of the physical evolution in humans that may trace our roots on the planet.
The Dover revolution marks the beginning of a significant shift in America, it marks the rise of the majority of Christians, the many who find the political excesses of a loud minority offensive and not a fair representation of their faith. We will see a great deal more of this revolution in the months and years ahead.
Underlying this revolution is the recognition that Americans value independence, diversity and freedom much too highly to see these values submerged in values that represent only a small portion of the faith community.
President Bush unleashed the blurring of church and state, and if you don't see the damage created by that blurring, you are missing the obvious.
Our forefathers created the separation of church and state for many reasons, but most of all to avoid the issue of “who's faith” or “which religion” that would inject itself into politics, if permitted. And now we face just that issue.
We may take decades to put this genie back in the bottle, but the good people of Dover have announced that we will stop this movement, that Americans of all faiths will work together to save the country from the divisiveness of religious dominance in the political sphere.
Sorry Pat, in the end, you lose and America wins.
Dr. Jim Crawford is a local political enthusiast. He can be reached at drjim893@msn.com.