“He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind.”
Proverbs 11:29
In the 1960 movie “Inherit the Wind,” there’s a marvelous statement by actor Spencer Tracy in which Tracy (portraying attorney Henry Drummond) is asked if he finds anything holy.
Drummond answers, “Yes, the human mind. In a child’s power to master the multiplication table, there is more sanctity than in all your shouted “amens” and “holy holies” and “hosannas.” An idea is a greater monument than a cathedral. And the advance of man’s knowledge is a greater miracle than all the sticks turned to snakes or the parting of the waters.”
And it’s with that simple statement, that the debate between science and religion is brought into sharp focus. Having taken place in the summer of 1925 — more than 75 years ago — one would think the American public would have moved forward since then.
Think again.
This year, while the rest of the world dealt with problems such as education, poverty and the economy, here in Oklahoma state Rep. Todd Thomsen sought to roll back time.
Thomsen, a Republican, filed a resolution condemning the University of Oklahoma for bringing professor Richard Dawkins to campus for a speech about evolution. Dawkins appeared during a week-long celebration of the work of Charles Darwin.
Thomsen’s resolution expressed his “disapproval of the actions of the University of Oklahoma to indoctrinate students in the theory of evolution; opposing the invitation to Richard Dawkins to speak on campus; and directing distribution.”
In this legislative example of the 2-year-old tantrum, Thomsen claimed “the department of zoology at the University of Oklahoma has, as evidenced on the departmental homepage, been framing the Darwinian theory of evolution as doctrinal dogmatism rather than a hypothetical construction within the disciplines of the sciences” and “the department... has been engaged in one-sided indoctrination of an unproven and unpopular theory and made an effort to brand all thinking in dissent of this theory as anti-intellectual and backward rather than nurturing such free thinking and allowing a free discussion of all ideas which is the primary purpose of a university.”
Thomsen goes to, requesting an “open, fair and honest discussion” about the issue, but also condemning “the invitation to speak on the campus of the University of Oklahoma to Richard Dawkins of Oxford University, whose published statements on the theory of evolution and opinion about those who do not believe in the theory are contrary and offensive to the views and opinions of most citizens of Oklahoma.”
Amazing.
To say on one hand “let’s talk about it,” then add, “but don’t bring in anyone I disagree with,” is, perhaps, the most intellectually dishonest statement I’ve seen in a long time.
With this one resolution, Rep. Thomsen has not only embarrassed himself, but the other 3.5 million souls who call themselves Sooners. I am amazed that during a time of great national trouble issues such as the Thomsen resolution and silly, idiotic ideas like “let’s build a monument to the Ten Commandments” on the capitol grounds are of greater concern than making sure our schools have enough funds to operate.
Rep. Thomsen and the leadership of the Oklahoma House of Representatives should ask themselves if resolutions like this are really helping solve the state’s problems.
But, before Thomsen and his Republican leaders do that, perhaps they need another lesson in the First Amendment. Perhaps, the good representative should crawl out of his cave and look at the world around him. Or maybe he should just remember the words of Spencer Tracy: “If you take a law like evolution and you make it a crime to teach it in the public schools, tomorrow you can make it a crime to teach it in the private schools? And tomorrow you may make it a crime to read about it. And soon you may ban books and newspapers. And then you may turn Catholic against Protestant, and Protestant against Protestant, and try to foist your own religion upon the mind of man. If you can do one, you can do the other. Because fanaticism and ignorance is forever busy, and needs feeding. And soon, your honor, with banners flying and with drums beating we’ll be marching backward, backward, through the glorious ages of that Sixteenth Century when bigots burned the man who dared bring enlightenment and intelligence to the human mind.”
Proverbs 11:29
In the 1960 movie “Inherit the Wind,” there’s a marvelous statement by actor Spencer Tracy in which Tracy (portraying attorney Henry Drummond) is asked if he finds anything holy.
Drummond answers, “Yes, the human mind. In a child’s power to master the multiplication table, there is more sanctity than in all your shouted “amens” and “holy holies” and “hosannas.” An idea is a greater monument than a cathedral. And the advance of man’s knowledge is a greater miracle than all the sticks turned to snakes or the parting of the waters.”
And it’s with that simple statement, that the debate between science and religion is brought into sharp focus. Having taken place in the summer of 1925 — more than 75 years ago — one would think the American public would have moved forward since then.
Think again.
This year, while the rest of the world dealt with problems such as education, poverty and the economy, here in Oklahoma state Rep. Todd Thomsen sought to roll back time.
Thomsen, a Republican, filed a resolution condemning the University of Oklahoma for bringing professor Richard Dawkins to campus for a speech about evolution. Dawkins appeared during a week-long celebration of the work of Charles Darwin.
Thomsen’s resolution expressed his “disapproval of the actions of the University of Oklahoma to indoctrinate students in the theory of evolution; opposing the invitation to Richard Dawkins to speak on campus; and directing distribution.”
In this legislative example of the 2-year-old tantrum, Thomsen claimed “the department of zoology at the University of Oklahoma has, as evidenced on the departmental homepage, been framing the Darwinian theory of evolution as doctrinal dogmatism rather than a hypothetical construction within the disciplines of the sciences” and “the department... has been engaged in one-sided indoctrination of an unproven and unpopular theory and made an effort to brand all thinking in dissent of this theory as anti-intellectual and backward rather than nurturing such free thinking and allowing a free discussion of all ideas which is the primary purpose of a university.”
Thomsen goes to, requesting an “open, fair and honest discussion” about the issue, but also condemning “the invitation to speak on the campus of the University of Oklahoma to Richard Dawkins of Oxford University, whose published statements on the theory of evolution and opinion about those who do not believe in the theory are contrary and offensive to the views and opinions of most citizens of Oklahoma.”
Amazing.
To say on one hand “let’s talk about it,” then add, “but don’t bring in anyone I disagree with,” is, perhaps, the most intellectually dishonest statement I’ve seen in a long time.
With this one resolution, Rep. Thomsen has not only embarrassed himself, but the other 3.5 million souls who call themselves Sooners. I am amazed that during a time of great national trouble issues such as the Thomsen resolution and silly, idiotic ideas like “let’s build a monument to the Ten Commandments” on the capitol grounds are of greater concern than making sure our schools have enough funds to operate.
Rep. Thomsen and the leadership of the Oklahoma House of Representatives should ask themselves if resolutions like this are really helping solve the state’s problems.
But, before Thomsen and his Republican leaders do that, perhaps they need another lesson in the First Amendment. Perhaps, the good representative should crawl out of his cave and look at the world around him. Or maybe he should just remember the words of Spencer Tracy: “If you take a law like evolution and you make it a crime to teach it in the public schools, tomorrow you can make it a crime to teach it in the private schools? And tomorrow you may make it a crime to read about it. And soon you may ban books and newspapers. And then you may turn Catholic against Protestant, and Protestant against Protestant, and try to foist your own religion upon the mind of man. If you can do one, you can do the other. Because fanaticism and ignorance is forever busy, and needs feeding. And soon, your honor, with banners flying and with drums beating we’ll be marching backward, backward, through the glorious ages of that Sixteenth Century when bigots burned the man who dared bring enlightenment and intelligence to the human mind.”
Comments