“Apologetics in the Void” are repostings from an on-going electronic discussion and debate I had some time ago with members of our local community. The list serve is called Vision 20/20, and hence the name “visionaries.”
In response to Joe’s question about earthquakes and zoning laws — his illustration is a good example of my point. I do not hold to the view that the different “races” are in fact different evolutionary races. I also accept the fact that contemporary evolutionists do not hold to this either.
My question is rather this: if evolution has not stopped, then the evolution of the “next” human race would evolve out of one of current branches. And that macro step would be preceded by micro steps. If you accept the idea of evolutionary “progress” at all (which is in itself a contradiction), then does this not give a biological imprimatur to racism in principle? One group is now proving itself “fitter” than the others.
This ties in with the issue of “truth claims.” Evolution is disputed by lots of people — as Malcolm Muggeridge put it, in retrospect evolution will be seen as one of the great jokes of history. But that is neither here nor there. The fact is that it is disputed. When you are deciding what to teach (or not) in the government schools, do you go with the sociological fact that it is significantly disputed and teach all sides? Or do you decide that some “truth claims” are either false or irrelevant, and dismiss them on the basis of a worldview? If so, what is the name of that worldview, and why are the adherents of another one out of court? By what standard do you evaluate the curriculum of the schools?