Arrogance

Okay, I think this letter printed in The Sun (our paper here in maryland) is a good example of one of people's major flaws. I'm going to retype it here in its entirety, and see if you can figure what about it is the cause for today's rant before I actually start my rant. Ready? Here we go:



Some people, including our president, think public schools should teach "intelligent design" along with the theory of evolution when teaching the subject of human origin. But when they say "intelligent design," do they mean the Judeo-Christian version? Or will the schools also teach theories about intelligent design by other religions as well? Shouldn't they also include creation stories of the various tribes of American Indians? And we shouldn't leave out the Incas and the Mayans, so as not to slight those who ave come to this country from lands to the south and have a different view of creation.

And why stop with creation? When the schools teach about birth, shouldn't they mention that some people think babies are delivered by the stork? And when they teach hygene, shouldn't they include the theory of the Tooth Fairy as well, since many young children believe these stories? The intelligent design subject is much too involved to be taught in the public schools. It is best left to be taught to children by their parents or in the religious schools of their choice. -Murray Spear (Saturday, Aug 13, 2005)



Okay now, who can spot my issue? Anyone? Smitty? Jessica? No? Okay, here's the deal. People today (myself not excluded, I"m sad to say) have become obsessed not only with being RIGHT, but with making their opponent appear SO wrong that they look silly or just plain dumb. Don't believe me? When was the last time you said (or thought to yourself) "well, I may not be right, but you aren't either." It happens all the time. Our arrogance has risen to the point where it's not just about us being right; it's about ensuring that the other person can't be right. Whether we're right or not is irrelevant, so long as someone else isn't.

Ordinarily, I hate reading editorials in the paper, because they're rarely more than the blathering of idiots who have no clue about the subjects on which they write. I had THOUGHT that Mr. Spear here was an exception, because he's right on one note: most proponents of intelligent design DO have simply the judeo-christian tradition in mind, and they ARE ignoring the fact that there is more than one intelligent design story. I was all onboard with him. ...until that second paragraph...

People think babies are delivered by storks? I'm willing to bet the mothers of the world could set these imbeciles straight. And the "theory of the tooth fairy?" That statement made me want to reach through the paper somehow and smack this dude on the back of the head. Scientists in the 3rd and 4th grade have long since disproven the tooth fairy theory. There has actually been recorded evidence that the tooth fairy is none other than the parents of said child sneaking in at night and replacing the tooth with money. The real question is what they do with the tooth afterwards. Seriously folks; intelligent design is not some fictional story told to 8-yr-olds to spur on their imagination. Is it a proven fact? Of course not. But it has been debated (in such childish fields as biology, physics, chemistry, philosophy, and theology) using reason coupled with experience for centuries now, probably millenia.

On the flip side, while we're on this subject, evolution is also NOT a fact, but a theory. And although I doubt the assertion that these two points of view are mutually exclusive (Hands up, who can concieve of a creator who made the universe in such a way that it would evolve?), the fact is (and it's probably the only real "fact" of this matter) is that both theories revolve around how humans came to exist, and both are popular and researched enough to warrant being taught in public school. Does creationism have to include the whole "God spake, saying "Let there be light" thing from Genesis? Of course not. But it could point out the intricacies of the universe, and the complexities of human existence, and say "There's a good chance that someone or something MADE all this." In the same tone, evolutionism doesn't have to mention the search for the missing link between man and ape. (Surprise, all you atheistic, sensless evolutionistic blatherers: Darwin's theory NEVER claimed that man evolved from monkeys. Ever. A student of his misrepresented what Darwin wrote for a similar reason that you attack creationism now: To be right, and to prove us religious types are just silly dunderheads. Darwin only asserted that existent humans changed minor facts about ourselves over time. Example? We're (for the most part) not as hairy as we used to be because we now wear clothes to keep ourselves warm.) In any event, I (don't) look forward to reading more about this in the paper as the subject will surely continue to be argued so long as people feel the need to be right and make the other person look dumb.

Incidentally, yes, I did try to ridicule the find, upstanding gentleman who wrote this article. Firstly, I said upfront that I, too, was guilty of this tactic. Secondly, he started it. Thirdly, come on. He said "the theory of the tooth fairy." If that very statement didn't make you want to beat the life out of him due to it's utter inanity and misusage, than I guess you are a better person than I.