Our friend has been attending a "mini-medical college" at a nearby university. One of the recent seminars was on birth and genetic defects. The lecturer concluded that such things (and, therefore, the people with those defects) were evolution's way of "experimenting" with the human race. Of course, the obvious question, which someone asked the professor in all seriousness is: if they are just "experiments" which bog down the human genome and serve no purpose, then why bother to give them a good quality of life or allow them to procreate? The professor had no response other than to defer the question in the name of "ethics."
However, the thing about molecules-to-man evolution is that it's not just a scientific hypothesis, it's a worldview, embracing history, science, and morality. When you replace God with another creative force (in this case, evolution), you can't just chuck morality and ethics out the window (nor can you continue to borrow them from the Christian worldview). Science doesn't operate in a vacuum. Ideas and beliefs (including the belief in godless evolution) have consequences--serious consequences. In this case, life-denying (as opposed to life-affirming) consequences.
Here is my friend's follow-up article on this topic.
No comments:
Post a Comment