Friday, January 21, 2011


Use It Or ...

There's a puff-piece in Christianity Today on Roberta Ahmanson, wife of Howard Ahmanson, who are, Ahmanson freely admits, "probably the single largest supporter of the intelligent design movement, and have been since the beginning." Like most creationists, what she really abhors is "theistic evolution" because it "legitimates naturalism as the mode of understanding reality." Riiight! Can't have no scientists explaining what's real to anyone!

But if you want to know about the Ahmansons, this is the money quote:

[I]n a scathing 2004 Salon profile of Howard, "Avenging Angel of the Religious Right," Max Blumenthal took pains to show that the Ahmansons' ultimate goals are theocratic, a charge that has been widely disseminated. Roberta at once denies and defends the claim: "I never was, and I don't know if Howard ever was either. I'm afraid to say this, but also, what would be so bad about it?"

Ummm ... well ... by definition, a theocracy is not a democracy and some of us think democracy is a good idea. The fact that Roberta (and her husband?) don't think it is such a big deal speaks volumes.

I wonder how the DI flaks will spin this?
Dear Mr. Pieret,

My name is Sarah from Article Writing Services. We have a client who would like to pay you for the opportunity to post some of their content on your website. All of the content is professionally produced and you can select from pieces relevant to your audience.

The result is you get some free, interesting content for your readers while getting paid.

In return our client is asking for one link that they specify at the bottom of the content (no porn or gambling). Feel free to contact me with any concerns or clarifications you may have.

If you would like to see some examples of our content, please email me at so we can begin.


Sarah Miller
Outreach Manager - Article Writing Services
My guess is that they'll just ignore it. It's not like the connection between Ahmanson and the DI and Ahmanson and the Reconstructionists hasn't come up before.
Of course, what is never mentioned by proponents of theocracies is that they are only acceptable if the "theo" in question is their personal one. Anything else would be an abomination.
...perhaps a representative theocracy, with parties aligned to particular deities ("Vote Amish for Good Roads!")
I'll bet Roberta Ahmanson uses naturalistic understanding of the world to cross a busy street.
"Vote Amish for Good Roads!"

As long as you're driving a horse and buggy!

I'll bet Roberta Ahmanson uses naturalistic understanding of the world to cross a busy street.

One of my favorite examples of "methodological naturalism" is "if you're crossing a street and see a bus 25 feet away bearing down on you, do you stop to contemplate whether, perchance, it might suddenly disappear, instead of, in a wholly naturalistic way, continue towards you, with all the bone-crushing possibilities? ... Or do you run like hell?"

If you run, you are a naturalist.
Perhaps there's a need to highlight the connection between Ahmansons and the Christian Reconstructionists, specifically RJ Rushdoony, who declared (among many other mad things) that democracy is heresy, and the importance of believing in a literal, 6 24-hour-day Creation event. His magazine included the infamous article about stoning disobedient children.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

. . . . .


How to Support Science Education