Is this the true reason atheists stay at the R+S category?

Question

Professor Richard Lewontin, a geneticist (and self-proclaimed Marxist), is a renowned champion of neo-Darwinism, and certainly one of the world’s leaders in promoting evolutionary biology. He recently wrote this very revealing comment (the italics were in the original). It illustrates the implicit philosophical bias against Genesis creation regardless of whether or not the facts support it:

We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfil many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.

Richard Lewontin, Billions and Billions of Demons, The New York Review, 9 January 1997, p. 31.

Many people do not realize that the teaching of evolution propagates an anti-biblical religion. The first two tenets of the Humanist Manifesto II (1973), signed by many prominent evolutionists, are:

1. Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created.
2. Humanism believes that Man is a part of nature and has emerged as a result of a continuous process.

This is exactly what evolution teaches. Many humanist leaders are quite open about using the public schools to proselytize their faith. This might surprise some parents who think the schools are supposed to be free of religious indoctrination, but this quote makes it clear:

I am convinced that the battle for humankind’s future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being. These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach, regardless of the educational level—preschool day care or large state university. The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new—the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism … .

J. Dunphy, A Religion for a New Age, The Humanist, Jan.–Feb. 1983, 23, 26 (emphases added), cited by Wendell R. Bird, Origin of the Species Revisited, vol. 2, p. 257.

atheists naturally assume I am a Christian?
ha! that just goes to show you, that atheists are incredibly overt with their false assumptions.

Answer 1

Yes, that seems to be the case. And as loudly as the atheist screams, "people are pushing their beliefs on me", it is in fact the atheists who have taken up the charge of staying in the religion category to push the relgion of atheism upon the believer in God.

Answer 2

Eye-roll.

First, note how the piece smears him from the start (mentioning Marxism).

Then come the lies. Lewontin is actual a critic of traditional neo-Darwinian mechanisms (putting him in Stephen Jay Gould's camp).


The "quote" attempts to paint him as someone who thinks the foundations of science are faulty when he's probably just criticizing a particular theory he doesn't like (remember, there are competing schools of thought about the mechanisms of evolution--that does not mean he does not trust that evolution is a fact!).

Materialism is a philosophical issue, and the alternative (dualism) has been pretty much dead for a long time. Thus, we look for materialistic explanations in theories of mind SO WE DON'T HAVE TO BELIEVE IN GHOSTS. This has nothing to do with evolution, by the way, even though the creationist would have us think so.


Once again, this is nothing more than creationist LIES and propaganda.



Also note that the poster is apparently too dense to realise that humanism and evolution are NOT the same thing. Most of us do not agree with teaching humanism in public schools.

Answer 3

it particularly is particularly useful to spell examine your paintings formerly dealing with atheists. they're going to capture issues like that and you wind up looking silly. It undermines your question/argument. As to your question, the religion and Spirituality section is approximately questions and discussions approximately faith and spirituality. Sorry, it is the way it particularly is. Your argument would properly be circled to argue why do christians come to R&S in the event that they're defend of their ideals. additionally, do not overlook that many religious human beings pass out and submit religious questions in non R&S categories. gay and Lesbian section and the math and technological know-how sections are a pair the place those questions get published. If those human beings can pass and try this then non-religious human beings can pass and ask questions in R&S. as properly, I even have discovered many new issues from questions and solutions from the different atheists at right here.

Answer 4

Drawing on things decades old and calling them "recent"? Hmm...

I have no idea how you are connecting our efforts to prevent theocracy with materialism. Your quote is interesting, but it also has many flaws. For example, I doubt you would rather return to life with the health care that was available even 20 years ago rather than that we have today. Clearly life & health are improved. Neil Kamen has helped to feed millions of people by developing rice that quadruples yield in a given acre. But he is correct in one thing: Materialism does not allow a devine foot in the door. It denies supernaturalism.

But it does so with evidence. To allow for supernaturalism would require every scientific finding to conclude with the statement: "Or this could have been a miracle, and our findings are meaningless." That's why scientific findings have to be replicable. Anything that they study is assumed to result from deterministic laws. Supernaturalism has never been able to show a single shred of evidence that any God ever intervenes in the natural world. And if it did, the money would flow like an open fire hydrant to replicate such a study. There is no such evidence. If ever you find one, let me know.

^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^

Answer 5

He sounds like a leader, who saw which way the crowd was running and jumped in front shouting, "follow me!". Or, the lack of italics, has made your point rather obsure...

Answer 6

Yawn

Answer 7

You're connecting evolutionary biology with Humanism like some sort of conspiracy? Have you taken your meds today?

Answer 8

"Many people do not realize that the teaching of evolution propagates an anti-biblical religion."

Evolution is not a religion.

Answer 9

May I ask your religion?

Answer 10

LOL!

You proved that Top Contributor can also be a copy-paste Troll..!!

Oh wait, that's just a typical christian thing isn't it...