John McCain recently spoke out on Intelligent Design, and I couldn’t be happier with what he said — except the part where he said he personally believes in evolution. What a nut! I’m not kin to no ape! But then, this is why McCain has a reputation as an “independent thinker” when anyone with half a brain knows he’s on our side and always has been.
So McCain, when responding to a question about whether Intelligent Design should be taught in schools “mocked the idea that American young people were so delicate and impressionable that they needed to be sheltered from the concept.”
“Shhhhh,” he said, “you shouldn’t tell them.”
Boy, what a kidder.
Now, I know there are those who would point out that the debate regarding Intelligent Design has absolutely nothing to do with whether kids should know about Intelligent Design — but rather, it’s about not establishing religion, and it’s about what passes for science.
After all, their argument might go, the majority of Americans believe in an Intelligent Designer — they call It “God!” — and there are churches all across America which discuss the Big Fella (and bible colleges, like the one I attend, which is a very good bible college indeed); so, by not teaching Intelligent Design in schools, no one is being denied knowledge of an Intelligent Designer.
However (these liberal Dumbocrats might continue), by teaching Intelligent Design in schools, you are establishing religion, and if you teach it in science classes, widening the definition of science to such a degree that even astrology could be considered a science (Behe said it in court, and he’s on your side, these liberals might say).
Science (they might say), is a process by which hypotheses are made and tested, and since the concept of an Intelligent Designer is not falsifiable, since it can’t be tested, even if there is an Intelligent Designer (and there is, guys!), it wouldn’t be science to teach such. We can only go by the evidence we have in the natural world, the fossil records, DNA evidence, and so on, and all of that points toward evolution — and not the Lamarckian variety either! And (these fools might continue), it is perfectly acceptable for someone to believe that an Intelligent Designer was involved somehow — but that is a belief not based on evidence, not a testable theory, but is rather based on faith, and faith is not something that should be taught in science classes.
Yeah, that’s what the liberal Dumbocrats might argue. And if I were standing in a room with them and they made such an arguement I would say, “Stop trying to confuse me with reason!”
Then I would say, ” Your argument about establishing religion is hooey. We’re one nation under God! We’re a Christian nation already, so when you deny God access to the classrooms, you’re denying what has made this country so great for so long — and that’s our total disregard for the evidence at hand, and our willingness to believe whatever we want regardless of what the data suggests, so go and take your intellectualism elsewhere!”
Yeah, that’s what I’d say, all right.