Origins Controversy: More at stake than commonly supposed   Continued   from Pg 1

This is an archive. For current issue, return to Home Page

Channeled by the constraints of physics man is nothing more than a "meat puppet." Everything he thinks, does and says are what he must think, do, and say. If everything is material, nothing can violate material law.  Not one thought, decision or action can exist without having been necessitated by a cause. Thoughts and actions may even be caused by a complex vectoral sum of multiple factors: past experience, training, body chemistry, and perhaps even such factors such as ambient air temperature and what was eaten for breakfast.  But the fact remains; our thoughts/actions are what they are because they could not have been different under the particular sum of factors.
This materialistic viewpoint sees our every thought,  word, and action as merely the mechanical result of a complicated causal chain of prior events. Moreover, because we are not "free" we are not accountable for our actions. If the next generation of
leaders buys into this materialist view of man, the cultural implications will be explosive. It would start with the call to "reprogram" criminals and deviants.  But since all of us are machines anyway, why stop there?  Why not program us all for optimal performance and cooperation in smoothly running society.?  An affront to human dignity? Politicians would simply argue that since we are all responding to programs anyway, we might as well ensure that our programming suits us for optimal functionality an improved society.
Think it can't happen here? Ideas have consequences.  Convince enough future judges, lawmakers and lawyers that people are not responsible for their actions and they will become more paternalistic.  Communists used to send people to "re-education" camps when they didn't tow the line.  Dissidents who held to religious beliefs were deemed "mentally ill" and treated with mind-altering drugs. Think thought
control only happens in other countries?
Think of the PC crowd on campuses who attempt to regulate expression (with a double-standard, I might add).  Insult a protected group and you have to answer for it.  Call a Christian a  bigot or a homophobe and nothing will happen to you. And talk about thought control--Think of the implications of the term homophobia. A phobia indicates an irrational fear--a type of mental condition (Call the psychiatrist!).  Imagine the power of a future thought police charged with reprogramming inconvenient attitudes.
So what should we be doing?   Simply put, we need to examine our beliefs (or lack of them).  If we are given a dignity and free will by God, we need to assert that in the public arena and not only in our churches.  We need to ensure that these concepts fully inform our laws and our jurisprudence. And we need to insist that a materialstic/deterministic  philosophy of life does not stand unopposed in our classrooms -PVETJ  Return to Pg.1