Frequent commenter, friend, and fellow Blogger blogger Democracy Lover has a post in which he waaxes indiginantly concerning parents teaching their children, not only that creationism is true, but that evolution is an evil, Satanic plot to destroy true American Christian living. Indignant that such is occuring, he insists not only that such teaching be banned, but that those responsible be arrested. The children, apparently, will be turned over to those better suited for caring for their inellectual and emotional health.
Such thinking is antithetical to eveything I believe and profess; thought police are thought police, whether I happen to agree with them or not. Hiding behind children is not only tired, it is old, and has a deadly history. Josef Stalin used the same excuse to endourage children to denounce their teachers, neighbors, even their parents to authorities.
I have a question for DL: Since what has constituted "scientific turth" has changed, and continues to change, at a drastic pace, which such version is acceptable? Is Newtonian physics outlawed because it is wrong? Do we ban Einstein, or perhaps Heisenberg, because they contracdict one another? Do we adhere to Darwin, Ernst Mayr, or Watson and Crick? What questions are legitimate questions, and which are unacceptable? Since science lives and breathes through the vigorous and open debate of ideas, even the theoretical foundations of all we hold to be true, what practical limits do we place upon what is, and is not, science? Again, who decides? Do we hide scientific debate entirely, because such debate may be poorly understood by children?
In the comments section of the post in question, Darrell claims that the First Amendment does not protect parents who lie to their children. So . . . half of American parents should be indicted because of the whole Santa Claus thing, I guess. Or is lying about Santa OK, but not about evolution. Of course, then we are back to the question of what standard we use to figure out what is a "lie" and what is not.
The First Amendment overs everyone, even those we find abhorrent - the Klan, Sparatacists, Joe Klein - and I will defend these and myriad others in their right to teach and live their lives the way they want to. Freedom is hard. America is hard. Legally enforced orthodoxy of any kind is antithetical to the spirit of the American constitution. Liberal thought police are as bad as conservative thought police. Thuggery is thuggery, even if I happen to agree with the thugs in question.
