Poor Professor Michael Reiss, laterly Director of Education at the Royal Society. Today he has succumbed to the liberal elite’s prejudices against creationists, despite being less of a creationist and more of a card-carrying member of the liberal elite himself.
Professor Reiss’s first mistake was to suggest that if students raised their belief the world was created by God, and rejected evolution, that it might be in order to talk about it in a way that didn’t amount to “your religious belief is just wrong and that’s that”. As this departs from the Darwin Party line that creationists are to be deprived of the oxygen of publicity, even in a classroom, and as the locals who had won the attention of the Nobel committee were having a hissy fit about it, the Professor has had to quit. No-one must be allowed to think for even a moment that the world we live in could have come about any other way than through random collisions of chemicals and billions of years of death and suffering, and anyone who expresses a contrary view should be humiliated in front of their classmates.
The Professor’s second mistake was all about timing. Tens of millions of Americans have just decided to show an interest in their own Presidential election, due to Senator McCain’s pick of Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate. Like a clear majority of the US electorate, Governor Palin says schools should “teach the controversy” – i.e. evolution doesn’t get unquestioned acceptance, and some of the problems with it should be explored. And this leaves the sneaking suspicion in many liberal minds that Governor Palin, who might yet be President, might not accept Darwin’s theory itself – and this may lie behind her rejection of other liberal shibboleths, like the idea that unborn children haven’t really developed all the way to being human, and can therefore be systematically wiped out. These dangerous notions could spread, and someone must take a stand!
As at other times, we can always look to the Church of England for culturally relevant spiritual guidance. This week, the Church apologised, directly, almost in-person, to Charles Darwin for misunderstanding his grand theory. The chief reason this is odd, is that there is every reason to believe that the churchy folk who were around at the time theory was propogated understood it quite well, thanks very much, but chose respectfully to disagree with it, rather like those dangerous children that Professor Reiss was talking about. This sort of radical behaviour must be stopped, by firm action, like apologising to dead people for offences that never took place.
Did I mention that our Professor was an Anglican clergyman – and one who firmly believes in evolution as one of God’s means of creation – and therefore in the position of Anglican compromise that aims at being all things to all men, and ends up pleasing none of the people none of the time?
Professor Reiss had to go, not because he was introducing creationism (which he only ever sought to deny), but because he was threatening to remove from the Darwinistas their chief weapon in favour of their own worldview, namely the ability to pick on someone their own intellectual size, such as a schoolchild with a passing knowledge of a subject that the teacher is supposed to be an expert in, and bully them into rejection or amendment of the beliefs they imbibed with their mother’s milk, and by so doing to snuff out any attempt to question their system of belief, a bit like the medieval priests that the Darwinists themselves condemn.
This week I drove past an Anglican church where some friends got married a few years ago. It was being bulldozed, to make way for an additional car-park for a football stadium. This is just the sort of thing that would be frustrating both to Professor Reiss and his detractors. Where now will local atheists go on Sundays as they try to get their kids into the best schools?