Daily Archives: January 28, 2009
Religionists see heaven as utopia and ask why not. Sientists see utopia as life and earth and ask don’t ask why. They have to believe only in here and now because they know that when they die that’s it, dead, gone never to return to anything but dust and microbes.
Evolution is the political third rail in this country and in education. It is the only accepted world view. It is the Bible of the atheists in this country. And yes, they do have a bible, a script, a scripture they all quote chapter and verse.
If you don’t believe me you need to watch this documentary “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.”
Evolution was a hard-won legal, not scientific, concept that life arose spontaneously on earth. And from a single cell, a single strand of DNA arose all life including and up to man. This takes no intelligence according to and despite the evidence to the very complicated opposite observations made by eminent scientists on both sides of this argument. It warns to beware of one hand clapping.
But if one believed that this was it, life here on earth, I mean ONE, SINGLE life on earth was it, then what kind of life will one lead? Interestingly enough those who push this belief, and it is a belief just like religion, they want you accept its myopic rightness. Simple, they are right and if you believe in God and intelligent design you are wrong and worse crazy.
After watching an excellent documentary “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” it Darwined on me that my work would never be accepted because it is the antithesis to American worldview–there is no God here. Atheists make the world go round for sure. I got a bellyful of atheism when studying for my masters degree in Anthropology which means I studied race science and biological anthropology. It is full of racial stereotypes and atheism. It depressed me. What else is new?
If you want to see just how “free” we are in this country then you need to watch this movie. I highly recommend it if you have any thoughts rattling around in your brain. My interest is purely selfish. I want rebirth to become the new religion. And I want to be the author of that religion.
Rebirth the truth that I preach will never be accepted in the scientfic community. Why? Because it supposes, implies, deducts that there is intelligent design, intelligent purpose to life, creation. There is a divine plan. A plan that is known to the creator and unknown to His creation.
Finally, you can freely download a pdf copy of my book “Dinner With DaVinci” (for a limited time) at my Web site thepolitikos.com
Geez, I didn’t know it was also Charles Darwin’s anniversary along with the 200th anniversary of Abe Lincoln. I’ve always appreciated his book “Origin of the Species” because it is a simple book. No talk of evolution, in fact the word evolution cannot be found in his book. He did not invent it, he is called the father of evolution perhaps but he was a mystified as anyone as to how we went from a single cell to a human being or to any animal in between.
Sure, students need to know about evolution. By definition means merely “change over time.” This is what we want students to learn, what we teach them. That’s a simple concept and it does not take you from squirrel to humankind, it just takes you, maybe, from one species of squirrels to another. They changed over time because they moved from one locale to another or because they lost food or the weather changed and they did not bring a coat or clippers.
Darwin is overrated because the scientists needed a fall guy and he’s dead and therefore available.
As one who has spent twelve-plus years in parochial school in Chicago, St. Anselm and Mercy CHS to be exact the one thing that Catholic-schooled children know well are the ways of the nuns and sisters. The movie Doubt portrays life in such a Catholic setting. The watch word is “strict,” not critical. Strictness is what you remember about going to Catholic school and being taught by nuns. They brooke no arguments therefore are never critical. I mean what’s there to criticize when your word is law?
While nuns may not wear the garments of criticism Heloise does share some critical doubts about Doubt. Meryl Streep is once again nominated for best actress in this little film. Viola Davis is also nominated as best supporting actress. And I can tell you Viola nearly takes nun Meryl’s habit off while they argue in a “bring it” manner on the cold snowy streets near the school her son attends.
Sister Streep is cold, calculating and critical of the priest who is also the pastor of the school. He hears confessions and says mass on Sundays. The object of his affection is a young black boy who is also one of the altar boys. He craves the attention of the priest because he is the token black student in the school. That happens in Catholic school but more often than not. The schools are typically segregated just like the public schools except that they are not housed in run-down shanties as so many black public schools in the deep South.
Streep plays spiritual foil to that other great male actor Philip Seymore Hofman. One can easily worship at his altar . He delivers another crack performance as the suspicious priest of Doubt. When the token black boy is picked on he is there to literally help him pick up the pieces that some boys have slapped to the floor.
Priest Hofman seems well, sleezy enough, but then that is not the plan. Priests aught to be above suspicion and this is the mantra of Sister Streep–we suspect you therefore we doubt you therefore you must go.
He does go but we know how that will end. We know that he will get another rectory and another chance to appear “suspicious.” We also get a peek inside the classroom of Sister Amy. She is a new, nervous, shaky teacher who cannot handle the nice little white kids in her charge. That lack of control in Catholic classrooms in my day and the day of this film is just about as rare as married priests, again doubtful.
While I have no direct experience or knowledge of priest doing wrong and wrong doings sexual or otherwise, I have followed those who have experienced this betrayal. And this is the other thing that makes this movie doubtful in my eyes–why would a mother let her son be abused knowingly? This is what Viola’s charater asks us to believe. We should not doubt that it is urgent that her son be accpeted, educated and graduated.
Doubt is a short film, not a very convincing film despite four very fine performances from the cast. Four stars would be one too many for this film. But I do recommend it. Will Meryl pull it off again? Stay tuned for my Oscar predictions.