January 30, 2004

And on the Seventh Day, He Bitchslapped them: A Manifesto in Rant Form

by peterb

Scalzi identifies an initiative of the Georgia Department of Education to eliminate the word "evolution" from the curriculum as being stupid. And he's right. He has a bit to say about Creationists, and describes them as "willfully ignorant" rather than stupid. I think I disagree with that distinction: if you're a Creationist, you are stupid. If you know a Creationist, they are stupid. There is no shame in looking at a drooling idiot moronic pus-filled sack of barely firing synaptic connections and calling them "stupid."

Even if they are wearing an Armani suit and know how to lobby Congress.

Now, I understand (I think) what Scalzi is getting at: don't underestimate the enemy. That's good advice. Obviously, there's a risk that calling someone "stupid" will lead you to think that they pose no risk to you and yours, that they couldn't possibly outmaneuver you politically, socially, or financially. But as more than 200 years of US history and the current worldwide popularity of Britney Spears shows us, Stupid turns out to have quite a lot of influence.

Plenty of attributes are more dangerous in an enemy than stupid. An enemy can be cagey, crafty, aggressive, agile, persistent, evil, single-minded, and dishonest, and still be stupid. Just look at the American Family Association, for example.

So let's hear it for calling people stupid. I think we don't do it enough. The world has enough tolerance to go around that I feel like I'm just bringing a little balance to the table when I point out that, in objective terms, anyone who thinks the world was created in 7 days just a few thousand years ago is stupid. Really stupid. How stupid, you ask? Stupid in a accidentally-drank-drano-instead-of-vodka sort of way. Stupid in a drooling idiot mongoloid fucktard assrapes small children at the pancake breakfast sort of way. Stupid in a thinks Saddam masterminded the 9/11 attacks and figures if you have slanty eyes you must be Chinese sort of way.

Stupid, in other words, in a "You goddamn smug Christian pigfucker, I will do everything in my power to keep a moron like you from having anything to do with my child's education, and if you don't like it, you can choke on my bile and go into a permanent degenerative coma" sort of way.

Those of us who are not religious extremists did not start this culture war. But you had better believe we intend to win it.

Posted by peterb at January 30, 2004 08:13 PM | Bookmark This

Do you read talk.origins, by any chance? Your comment reminded me of something Andy Groves wrote recently: http://www.google.com/groups?selm=991ea4ae.0401301400.d1ed621%40posting.google.com.

It's true. You really have to be incredibly stupid and warped by miseducation to be a creationist.

Posted by PZ Myers at January 31, 2004 06:01 PM

Wow, great post. No, actually I don't keep up with Usenet much nowadays, and always avoided the talk.* tree on the theory that it was just begging for Deep Hurting.

But, of course, Andy is right! Our language differs, but clearly we are kindred spirits. Feel free to point him towards my post if you want.

Thanks for the pointer!

(also, I have no point here, I just like saying "Dave Wrongbeck")

Posted by peterb at January 31, 2004 07:08 PM

I presume by "Creationist" you actually mean "Young Earth Creationist", who is a very recent arrival to the cosmological discussion. The vast majority of those who believe in a created universe do not hold to that theory (and in fact anyone who has taken even a cursory glance at geology can undermine it with a few simple questions). The much wider discussion which acknowledges an ancient earth and universe is not one US citizens have had much exposure to, as your Christian countrymen seem to excel at majoring on minor and hamstrung issues, yet 100 years ago it was the only "Creationism" in the argument.

In that, I truly feel for you. But if you are going to hold such vehement and impassioned opinions (itself a warning sign to you), you should read the other side of the argument as well. And not just in books written by those you agree with. You will have to look a bit further afield than the superficial (and comfortably inane) writings of the modern evangelical scientism, however.

After all, the truth has nothing to fear from a good argument (ie. polemic) - if it is indeed the truth.

Posted by monty at March 27, 2004 04:05 AM

Please help support Tea Leaves by visiting our sponsors.

November October September August July June May April March February January

December November October September August July June May April March February January

December November October September August July June May April March February January