Pat Robertson Free Zone
As of this writing, this blog is a Pat Robertson free zone. Not going to even mention his name. Here’s the bottom line: the man is fucking insane. He is not mainstream in any sense of the word. He advocates assassination of foreign leaders, terrorism against the American government, and divine retribution against those who dare to suggest that teaching religion as science in public schools is inappropriate. As fun as it is to point out this man’s repeated verbal atrocities, I’m getting tired of giving him a platform. He’s the crazy bum on the corner of the street with the cardboard sign promoting loony end-of-the-world predictions, except that he does it with a nice suit on television. So I’m done helping spread his madness. I wish him good luck, and may God and the Flying Spaghetti Monster both have mercy on his soul.
Robertson’s comments aside, there are huge holes in teaching evolution as fact.
For many years I have taught Sunday School, including the confirmation class at a major Manhattan Presbyterian church for a decade. I know that the “evolution” debate is very disturbing to kids. The orthodoxy [weirdness] of Pat Robertson is a big time turn off to kids for their faith. There is a new and much better way than any classroom doctrine to learn about the beliefs and the science related to the origins of life and the cosmos sketched in this post on my blog.
Amen, brother!
I’ve said before just what I think of Pat Robertson, but Andy Borowitz sums it up better than I ever could. And I think I’m gonna follow Mark from TxFx’s example and take his pledge….
My life has been a Pat Robertson free zone for years. I can’t stand the man.
The chronicles of Mad Marion
…Up next, some guy in Dover, Pennsylvania actually takes Robertson seriously…
Evolution doesn’t preclude the idea of a creator. Even the Big Bang theory doesn’t preclude the idea. The Intelligent Design vs. Evoution debate is fairly simple: we should be teaching children to reason, and to test, and to observe. When you come across something hard to explain, you don’t just say “it’s magic!” and call yourself a scientist. That’s a leap of faith, and should not be part of any public school curricula. Evolution as a general idea is observable. It doesn’t, however, speak to the ultimate origins of the universe. If your issue is with the Big Bang theory being taught as fact, then yes, it shouldn’t be. But objecting to evolution in general because “it’s just a theory” isn’t much different from objecting to the theory of gravity, or the theory of conservation of energy, etc. They are established theories. Moreover, evolution doesn’t conflict with the Biblical view of creation in the least. So what’s the problem? I’m guessing that the objectors here are from the “the world is only 9000 years old and humans are the same now as they were then.” That is not a rational view and we should not be teaching it in our schools.
I had a huge post to respond to this, but it got deleted, so I’m just going to give the gist of it. Basically, my problem is not that evolution is taught but that it’s taught as fact with very little support. The big bang theory has much more support then evolution, and so does the theory of gravity and the theory of conservation of energy. If schools want to teach it, fine, just don’t parade it as fact when there is so little evidence supporting it.
The Big Bang theory actually supports creation because although there is so much evidence in the universe that the big bang theory is mostly correct, nobody knows how it could have started, not to mention the chances that everything in it would’ve been so organized as to produce us eventually.
Basically, it annoys me that schools teach evolution as a fact, and it seems that the only reason they do is that if you DON’T want to believe in creation then evolution is literally the only alternative. This is the only thing I can think of that makes people cling so furtively to such an unsupported theory.
Creation and Evolution are not contradictory. And there is plenty of evidence for evolution. It did not, as you suggest, come about from a desire to reject creationism. I have to think that if you think there is little evidence, you haven’t studied it that closely. Try to keep in mind as you study it that a conclusion that evolution has and continues to occur does not in any way contradict the Bible’s view of creation.
Take this, for instance:
Boy, do I agree with that. My mother, though I love her very much, is somewhere between radical fanatic and cool mom. Those sound like two extremes because they are, believe me. One minute we’re cracking a joke, the next I’m getting a fire and brimstone lecture. Pardon the pun, but Lord!
She frequently listens to Pat Robertson, and while I can respect some of the people I’ve seen him work with who haven’t been radical, as far as I have seen, he is, as you said, fucking nuts. My mother agrees with him and nearly drives me up the wall sometimes. He’s gotten more radical over the years, too, it seems. I think it’s just the air. Everyone seems more radical these days.
As for the topic being commented on, I have to say that evolution doesn’t deny the existence of a creator. Some will say it does; others will say it doesn’t. Doesn’t really matter. I never had a gripe with being taught about evolution in class–none of the people in my class did–despite most of us being Christians or of some other faith. But the one thing I didn’t like was the blatant smackdown that was put on us to not bring faith into it. To me, that was oppression. People do have questions, and, whether there are answers scientifically or faithfully or not, they at least need airtime. That’s how people learn.
One thing I don’t like is how we want to remove faith from education–and elsewhere–altogether. I can see some being upset about faith being involved in science classes (I don’t totally agree, but I’m not gonna burst a vein over it); it’d take forever for every faith to be touched on to appease everyone.
But removing prayer, faith books, discussions about God (of any religion) in all classes is absurd and denial of the world we live in. No world will ever be without the faithful, no matter their religion.
What if we just didn’t teach any more Native American/African American/etc. history? People would lack knowledge and, therefore, a great deal of tolerance and understanding among groups. It could turn into group and self segregating. I fear that if we totally block personal religion that can be openly discussed from our public institutions, we risk creating deeper divides and misconceptions. That’s just my opinion, though.
There is a thoughtful analysis here by a scientist as to why dismissing the mechanism of evolution could be detrimental to our efforts to prevent pandemics. I believe deeply in the power of prayer, but I also know the Lord asked us to love Him in a way that includes “all our minds.” Faith and evolution are not one thing you choose over the other. God is Creator of all things and mechanisms – including what we can know about the microbes that could kill us.
What attention would Pat Robertson get from the rest of us if he didn’t say something incendiary and outrageous from time to time? Once again he stumbles onto the world stage to put his blessed foot into his mouth. I mean, who really takes anything he says seriously? He purports to speak with such theological assurance, the basis for his blunders. With Robertson’s religious terms let me say: Woe, Pat. Woe, unto any minister who would divide God’s house for politics!
An Appeal to Pat Robertson: For the Gospel’s Sake, Please Quiet Thyself!
With all respect due to an older man, Pat Robertson needs to be encouraged to stop speaking on behalf of God and bringing unnecessary shame upon the church. In light of his recent statements, Reformed evangelical leaders have produced a needed, charit…
[...] That's when I came across this post over at Tempus Fugit. Mark hits the nail on the head and expresses my sentiments easily and precisely. Rather than give any credence to Pat's further ramblings, I'm crossing him off of my list of people to talk about here. I believe, as Mark suggests, that discussing Pat's latest atrocity each time he opens his mouth somehow lends credence to his words, somehow extends his reach by subjecting others to the hatred he claims is of his god. [...]