Skip to main content

Evangelicals divided

Image
By
Good for this young man for standing up in the face of blind, willful ignorance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs5QdwSvhnM

Unfortunately, wherever we find someone standing up for science and reason, in this case a sensible position on the environment and global warming in the church, there are plenty of those willing to push back for irrationality. Armed with straw man arguments, Tony Perkins takes aim at Johnathan Meritt for petitioning to have a greater acknowledgement about global warming within the faith. Signed by several prominent Southern Baptist leaders, the petition condemns the church as having been "too timid" on the issue.

Perkins refuses to look seriously at the issue, throwing up the straw man that, concerned with population, environmentalism promotes abortion and homosexuality. Oh yes, I remember the last time I heard Al Gore or Bill McKibbon encourage their audiences to go have an abortion and become homosexuals; wasn't it just last week? They must surely do it all the time, in Perkin's little world.

And also in Perkin's world, even if global warming scientists are right, who cares, because it will mean we've entered the End Times. So don't even bother taking any action, don't "throw away your SUV keys" because Jesus will rescue us from ourselves! And what if you are wrong, Mr. Perkins? What if it doesn't mean the end, and we have to deal with the effects that we've brought upon ourselves for centuries to come, what then?

The petition advanced said that if no action is taken, the church risks looking "uncaring, reckless and ill-informed". Look no further than Mr. Perkins for what those three characteristics look like.
Labels:

Comments

  1. ZenFebruary 6, 2011 at 9:51 AM

    Mr. Perkins' militant and willfully dangerous beliefs are a global threat. Would it be correct to call him a Christian Eco Terrorist?

    I mean, he probably has some mean labels he likes to pin on those who don't accept his dangerous myopic worldview, shouldn't we return the favor? ;)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Herla cyningFebruary 6, 2011 at 10:28 AM

    You can certainly call him "irresponsible," if you like; "eco-terrorist" may be a bit too much. :-)

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Unanswerable Questions" for Evolution Part One

By
Creation Ministries International has launched a new initiative, which seems a lot like all the other creationists blitzkriegs before it. With the wonderfully creative tagline of "Question Evolution", CMI intends to challenge "evolutionists" and their "indoctrination" of high school students with the supposed dogma of evolution. They also aim to  cut the population of atheists by half , presumably by challenging the "faith" that every atheist (and only atheists, no "real Christians") is supposed to hold in Darwin's great idea. The main thrust of this is a tract with fifteen "unanswerable" questions for evolutionists. I'm done putting quotation marks around the word, evolutionists; from here on out I ask my readers to recognize that it is a creationist term that is about as silly as calling someone a general relativist (accepts general relativity) or germist (for accepting germ theory). Regardless, CMI seems just as i...
Post a Comment
Read more

What Creationists Don't Understand

By
There are quite a number of concepts that one could successfully argue that creationists fail to understand; whether this is out of a simple lack of knowledge or willful ignorance is hard to say and certainly can't be generalized to every creationist. Some, the everyday creationist, I would like to think simply haven't been exposed to the evidence. Others, the holders of Ph.D's in various fields, especially in the sciences, who happily reject evolutionary theory are willfully ignorant (John Whitmore comes to mind). But I think there is one idea that creationists of all stripes simply fail to understand; evolution is based on solid, visible evidence. Evolution is not some tenant of a "science religion" that descended down to Darwin from on high, it is an explanatory framework based on quite a lot of facts and mountains of evidence. It is evidence that leads to the conclusions of evolution, that life changes over time and, given the long history of the earth, all ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Absurdity/Agony of War

By
Science writer Mary Roach is never one to shy away from parts of science that verge on the absurd, as anyone who has read any of her books surely knows. I'd read two of her previous books, and been enchanted enough by Roach's unique combination of endless curiosity and a wry sense of humor that I rushed to lay my hands on her newest book. Grunt: The Curious Science of Humans at War will not fail in living up to the expectations that fans of her work will bring. Those who have never read her before will be hard-pressed to put down a book that I finished in a few short days.  The real joy of reading something by Mary Roach is her talent for seeking out strange areas of science that a reader might never have known about. As an investigator, she answers questions you never knew you had. Her newest work   is no exception. We discover, for instance, how the military tests the ability of a fighter jet to survive a mid-air collision with a large bird--by firing a dead chicken...
Post a Comment
Read more