Godless: The Church of Liberalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Godless: The Church of Liberalism
Enlarge
Godless: The Church of Liberalism

Godless is a book by lawyer and right-wing author Ann Coulter. The book is a polemic against American liberalism, which Coulter regards as so anti-scientific and taking so many things on faith that it amounts to a "primitive religion" which has "its own cosmology, its own explanation for why we are here, its own gods, its own clergy. The basic tenet of liberalism is that nature is god and men are monkeys."[1]

Her fifth major work, it was published on June 6, 2006 (06/06/06), a date meant to coincide with the Number of the Beast "666" in The Book of Revelation.

Contents

[edit] Central thesis

Coulter argues that liberalism rejects the idea of God and reviles people of faith, yet bears all the attributes of a religion itself.[2] Coulter argues that the tenets of the liberal "church" are:

"According to Crown Senior Vice President and Publisher Steve Ross, the release date was selected before the book was even named and was, predominantly, a marketing decision. June 6 falls on a Tuesday this year and Crown, which releases all its titles on Tuesdays, wanted to ensure that Coulter's "most explosive book yet" came out "early enough in the summer to be one of the summer books that people would be reading."

[edit] The 9/11 "Jersey Girls"

In the book, Coulter criticized the Jersey Girls, four 9/11 widows who helped push for the 9/11 Commission and have been critical of US security policies (see Jersey Girls controversy)

To put the criticism in context, on page 103 of Godless, Coulter writes "They first came together to complain that the $1.6 million average settlement to be paid to 9/11 victims' families by the government was not large enough." Coulter goes on to say "These... women seemed genuinely unaware that 9/11 was an attack on our nation and acted as if the terrorist attacks happened only to them. The whole nation was wounded, all of our lives reduced." Her point, in context, being that these few widows were not the only victims that day.

On June 8, Coulter appeared at a book signing in Huntington, New York, home of many who died in 9/11, where she was handed a letter stating "Your latest comments deriding the widows of 9/11 are a disgrace to thousands who perished on that day," and that her claim that the women had profited from their husbands' death is a "nauseating misrepresentation of their struggle to keep the memory of what happened that day alive." by Huntington town board member Mark Cuthbertson, who told her "I'm here on behalf of many of my constituents. We are disgusted with your comments." Coulter tore up the letter.[4]

[edit] Christianity as represented in the book

The book begins with a quotation from Christian scripture: "They exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creation rather than the creator.... Therefore, God gave them up to passions of dishonor, for their females exchanged the natural use for that which is contrary to nature. — Romans 1:25-26"

Coulter also says in a footnote, "Throughout this book, I often refer to Christians and Christianity because I am a Christian and I have a fairly good idea of what they believe, but the term is intended to include anyone who subscribes to the Bible of the God of Abraham, including Jews and others."

[edit] Science and intelligent design

Coulter, who has no formal scientific background,[5] devotes approximately one-third of the book to attacks on evolution, which Coulter terms "Darwinism." Coulter turned to leading intelligent design proponents for tutors in writing this section of the book: "I couldn't have written about evolution without the generous tutoring of Michael Behe, David Berlinski, and William Dembski…"[5]

Chapter 8, The Creation Myth: On the Sixth Day, God Created Fruit Flies, advances the book's thesis that liberalism is a religion, this time by attempting to show what she argues is its cosmology. The chapter begins:

"Liberals' creation myth is Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, which is about one notch above Scientology in scientific rigor. It's a make-believe story, based on a theory that is a tautology, with no proof in the scientist's laboratory or the fossil record—and that's after 150 years of very determined looking. We wouldn't still be talking about it but for the fact that liberals think evolution disproves God."

Later in the chapter, she presents a parody—the "Giant Raccoon's Flatulence Theory"—to illustrate what she sees as fallacious arguments of those who espouse the theory of evolution. The "theory" states:

Imagine a giant raccoon passed gas and perhaps the resulting gas might have created the vast variety of life we see on Earth. And if you don't accept the giant raccoon flatulence theory for the origin of life, you must be a fundamentalist Christian nut who believes the Earth is flat.

The imagine, perhaps and might (italicized by Coulter in the book) refer to what she believes is the speculative, mythical, "made-up-story" nature of the modern evolutionary synthesis theory that species evolved through mutation and non-random selection.

Chapter 9, entitled Proof for How the Walkman Evolved into the iPOD by Random Mutation begins:

"Darwiniacs do not have a single observable example of one species evolving into another by the Darwinian mechanism of variation and selection. All they have is a story. It is a story that inspires fanatical devotion from the cult simply because their story excludes a creator. They have seized upon something that looks like progress from primitive life forms to more complex life forms and invented a story to explain how the various categories of animals originated. But animal sequences do not prove that the Darwinian mechanism of natural selection caused the similarities. It is just as likely that the similarities are proof of intelligent design, creationism, or the Giant Raccoon's Flatulence theory. The animal-sequence drawings allegedly demonstrating evolution by showing, for example, a little runt horse gradually becoming a grand stallion, are just that: drawings."

To back her opinion, Coulter refers to examples used in long-standing creationist arguments against evolution, such as Galapagos finches, the peppered moth, Piltdown man, Archaeoraptor, Haeckel's drawings, and the Miller-Urey experiment, presenting them as flawed, discredited, or made-up evidence and stating arguments to support her case. While portraying evolution theory as a "religion," Coulter portrays intelligent design as legitimate science:

"Nor are intelligent design scientists looking at things they can't explain: Quite the opposite. They are looking at things they can explain but which Darwin didn't even know about, like the internal mechanism of the cell, and saying, That wasn't created by natural selection—that required high-tech engineering. By contrast, the evolution cult members look at things they can't explain and say, We can't explain it, but the one thing we do know is that there is no intelligence in the universe. It must have been random chance, or it's not "science.""

The scientific community discounts the claims, such as Coulter's, that the modern evolutionary synthesis lacks scientific rigor, is based on a tautology, is without experimental or physical proof or that it "disproves God." The claim that modern evolutionary theory lacks rigor is emphatically rejected by the United States National Academy of Sciences which says that evolution is one of the most thoroughly tested and confirmed theories in science.[6] Coulter's assertion that evolution is based on a "tautology" is also widely considered to be baseless,[7] as are her claims that evolution is without proof[6][8][9] and is atheistic.[10] The scientific community[11] also views intelligent design not as a valid scientific theory but as pseudoscience[12] or junk science. [13] The National Academy of Sciences has stated that intelligent design "and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life" are not science because they cannot be tested by experiment, do not generate any predictions and propose no new hypotheses of their own.[6]

Coulter's reliance on controversial sources for science, intelligent design proponents and creationist sources, has prompted critics of the intelligent design movement to analyze her claims. PZ Myers, against Coulter's claim that there is no evidence for evolution, points to the scientific literature that contains hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, of articles about various aspects of evolution. He also argues Coulter has it backwards: The issue is not whether there is evidence that supports evolution, but whether there is evidence that is explained by evolution, since theories are explanations for data.[14] In response to Coulter's citing of Jonathan Wells' arguments concerning peppered moth evolution, Ian Musgrave argues that Coulter misrepresents the significance of the peppered moth experiments, makes a number of factual errors, and a "wildly ignorant misrepresentation of evolution."[15] James Downard criticized Coulter's favoring of secondary sources over primary sources, saying "she compulsively reads inaccurate antievolutionary sources and accepts them on account of their reinforcement of what she wants to be true."[16]

Media Matters for America responded to Coulter's "strawman" arguments against evolution by noting 11 types of "distortions" in her writing and going into detail explaining why her claims are false and contrary to science.[17]

[edit] Intelligent design and public education

One of Coulter's primary points is that there is no mention of intelligent design in the public school system. Coulter asserts that students should have the opportunity to debate evolution versus intelligent design in a classroom setting, a central tenet of the Discovery Institute's Teach the Controversy strategy employed by the intelligent design movement. Coulter argues that intelligent design proponents' challenges to the theory of evolution are immediately disqualified as being based on religious beliefs. Coulter claims this is evidence a of a liberal-left conspiracy to create generations of atheists taught through the public school system.[citation needed]

The world's largest general scientific society, American Association for the Advancement of Science, representing 262 affiliated societies and academies of science and 10 million individuals, has said that "although advocates of Intelligent Design usually avoid mentioning a specific creator, the concept is in fact religious, not scientific" and that efforts to teach "the controversy" are flawed as "there is no significant controversy within the scientific community about the validity of the theory of evolution. The current controversy surrounding the teaching of evolution is not a scientific one."[18] The ruling in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District found that intelligent design is not science but is essentially religious in nature and that "ID's backers have sought to avoid the scientific scrutiny which we have now determined that it cannot withstand by advocating that the controversy, but not ID itself, should be taught in science class. This tactic is at best disingenuous, and at worst a canard. The goal of the IDM is not to encourage critical thought, but to foment a revolution which would supplant evolutionary theory with ID."[19]

[edit] Accusations of Plagiarism, Distortions and Falsehoods

Critics have accused Coulter of plagiarism in writing the book, but her publisher has dismissed the accusations. John Barrie, creator of iParadigms, LLC's plagiarism-detection software, found in the book three instances of what he claims to be plagiarism.[20] The Rawstory website claims that she used text taken from the Illinois Right to Life website, making only slight changes for the book.[21] The TPM Muckracker website provided a "complete" list of examples of alleged plagiarism discovered so far in all of Coulter's works.[22] Coulter's publisher Crown Publishing Group characterized the charges as being "as trivial and meritless as they are irresponsible." [23]

On August 7, 2006 David Brock's website Media Matters for America claimed that Coulter misrepresented and distorted the statements of her sources, omitted information in those sources that refuted the claims in her book, misrepresented news coverage to allege bias, relied upon outdated and unreliable sources, and invented "facts."[24]

[edit] References

  1. ^ "Ann Coulter’s new book Godless: The Church of Liberalism is about how Liberalism has literally become a state enforced form of faith." Ann Coulter's Godless Makes the Liberals' Heads Spin With Obfuscation!
  2. ^ In Ann Coulter's latest book, she asserts that "liberalism contains all the attributes of what is generally known as 'religion,'" including a creation mythology (evolution), priests (public school teachers) and a holy sacrament (abortion). CyberCast News Service
  3. ^ "It's their version of virgin sacrifice. The Democrats will betray any special interest group -- except the pro-abortion ladies. If you mean why is it the holiest sacrament of the liberal religion, it is because they think if women have access to easy abortions, they can engage in carefree trysts without consequence." [1]
  4. ^ [2]
  5. ^ a b Coulter, Ann, Godless: The Church of Liberalism. From the book jacket: I couldn't have written about evolution without the generous tutoring of Michael Behe, David Berlinski, and William Dembski, all of whom are fabulous at translating complex ideas, unlike liberal arts types, who constantly force me to the dictionary to relearn the meaning of quotidian."
  6. ^ a b c Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition. National Academy of Sciences. 1999. Last accessed: 6 July, 2006 [3]
  7. ^ Claim CA500: Natural selection, or "survival of the fittest," is tautologous Index to Creationist Claims, edited by Mark Isaak. The TalkOrigins Archive. 2005.[4]
  8. ^ Claim CA202: Evolution has not been, and cannot be, proved. Index to Creationist Claims, edited by Mark Isaak. The TalkOrigins Archive. 2005.[5]
  9. ^ 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent. Theobald, Douglas L. The Talk.Origins Archive. Vers. 2.83. 2004. Last accessed: 6 July, 2006 [6]
  10. ^ Claim CA602: Evolution is atheistic. Index to Creationist Claims, edited by Mark Isaak. The TalkOrigins Archive. 2005.[7]
  11. ^ See: 1) List of scientific societies rejecting intelligent design 2) Kitzmiller v. Dover page 83. The Discovery Institute's Dissent From Darwin Petition has been signed by about 500 scientists. The AAAS, the largest association of scientists in the U.S., has 120,000 members, and firmly rejects ID. More than 70,000 Australian scientists and educators condemn teaching of intelligent design in school science classes. List of statements from scientific professional organizations on the status intelligent design and other forms of creationism.
  12. ^ National Science Teachers Association, a professional association of 55,000 science teachers and administrators in a 2005 press release: "We stand with the nation's leading scientific organizations and scientists, including Dr. John Marburger, the president's top science advisor, in stating that intelligent design is not science
  13. ^ "Biologists aren’t alarmed by intelligent design’s arrival in Dover and elsewhere because they have all sworn allegiance to atheistic materialism; they’re alarmed because intelligent design is junk science." H. Allen Orr. Annals of Science. New Yorker May 2005.Devolution—Why intelligent design isn't. Also, Robert T. Pennock Tower of Babel: The Evidence Against the New Creationism.
  14. ^ Ann Coulter: No evidence for evolution? PZ Myers. Pharyngula, scienceblogs.com June 18, 2006
  15. ^ Ann Coulter: Clueless Ian Musgrave. The Panda's Thumb, June 18, 2006
  16. ^ Secondary Addiction: Ann Coulter on Evolution Part I Part II James Downard. TalkReason, June 2006.
  17. ^ Ann Coulter's "Flatulent Raccoon Theory" Media Matters Jul 7, 2006
  18. ^ AAAS Statement on the Teaching of Evolution American Association for the Advancement of Science. February 16, 2006 (PDF file)
  19. ^ Ruling, Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, Case No. 04cv2688. December 20, 2005
  20. ^ Copycatty Coulter Pilfers Prose: Pro Philip Recchia. The New York Post, July 2, 2006
  21. ^ In new book, Coulter 'cribs' stem cell list from right-to-life group Ron Brynaert, June 14, 2006
  22. ^ List of Coulter Plagiarism Allegations Justin Rood, July 7, 2006
  23. ^ "Syndicator denies Coulter lifted material." Sun Herald. July 10, 2006. Retrieved on July 11, 2006.
  24. ^ Endnotes in Coulter's latest book rife with distortions and falsehoods Media Matters for America August 7, 2006

[edit] External links

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/h/e/Godless%7E_The_Church_of_Liberalism_6dfb.html"