Evolution and the Ron Paul Revolution

Evolution and the Ron Paul Revolution


Ron Paul Supporters Should Examine Evolution Just as Carefully as Any Other Mainstream Presupposition


by mediator
(Libertarian)
Tuesday, April 15, 2008

When Ron Paul expressed reservations about the theory of evolution, some of his supporters suddenly expressed reservations about their continued support for his candidacy.

Ron Paul supporters are known for the depth of their commitment to this principled physician. So what is it about questioning evolution that rattles even some Ron Paul supporters?

One would think Ron Paul supporters especially would be aware that everything the media puts forth as fact “ain’t necessarily so!”

It should also be remembered that the individual rights protected by our Constitution are founded on the belief that “all men are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights.”

Read again the opening of the Declaration of Independence:

In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Preamble

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…


A Constitutionalist should at least consider the implications for the foundation of our individual rights if a random, materialistic, evolutionary scenario of the origin and development of all life is correct.

Also to be considered is the fact that “race” is an evolutionary concept. Remember that the complete title of Darwin’s work is On The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. (bold added)

Perhaps a Constutionalist determined to preserve individual rights should take some interest in examining the validity of the “group think” that is based on evolutionary thought.

Admittedly, it may seem presumptuous, or worse, to question a “proven fact of modern science.” For those who think this is all just too far out, I make what I think will be an entertaining and enlightening suggestion: see a movie!

No, not just any movie. See Expelled, opening nationwide on April 18th. Author, lawyer, economist, Presidential speechwriter, and actor, Ben Stein, takes us around the world in interviews with top scientists examining the evidence for the evolutionary hypothesis. This film will raise the discussion of the origin of life to a new level. It’s a must-see.

For those still don’t want to risk their money, or their intellectual pride, by appearing to give “flat earthers” a hearing, I’d suggest a visit to the movie’s web site, which includes trailers, a press kit, and other information designed to promote intelligent discussion.

Perhaps everyone should see it, even if one’s only reason is to be able to give a full and accurate critique of a production that powerfully calls into question a major tenet of the modern scientific establishment.

Advertisements

3 Responses to Evolution and the Ron Paul Revolution

  1. Benjamin Franklin says:

    The title of Darwins work refers to “species”, not races as we percieve them today.

    If you have not already done so, and it really doesn’t seem that you have from your post – read Darwins “On the origin of Species” before critisizing it, and taking it for something that it is not.

    Rather than see a movie – read a book!

  2. myrmecos says:

    “Race” was a widely-used term among taxonomists of the time to denote a category within species similar to that of “subspecies” or “variety”, and it applied primarily to other species of animals. There were, for instance, numerous races of beetles and races of rabbits. The term was favored in pre-Darwinian zoology, and Darwin merely continued the common usage. The term fell out of taxonomic practice by the 1940s, largely based on the difficulties of telling a race from a full species.

    In other words, don’t base your argument on a facile misinterpretation of the title of an historic text.

  3. ttt says:

    Good article. I think the 2012 election is going to make or break us. Personally I’m a fan of Ron Paul and I think his policies would take care of this right here. I’ve done quite a bit of thinking about it and even some blogging here http://crookedamerica.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: