Peter Sprigg is the representative of aggrieved-parents and exgay-lobbying group PFOX on the citizens’ sex-education advisory committee of the Montgomery County school district in suburban Washington.
He is also an antigay activist working for the Family Research Council in Washington.
When he isn’t trying to turn Maryland sex-ed courses into exgay abstinence-only recruitment camps, Sprigg has apparently been battling the teaching of evolution.
Writing for FRC, Sprigg protests the award of legal fees to parents and civil liberties groups that recently won a years-long battle against the mandated teaching of creationism and anti-evolution propaganda in Dover, Pa.
Instead of blaming creationists for wasting years and millions of local taxpayer dollars, Sprigg blames those who believe that science classes should teach… science — and blames children and families of diverse religious backgrounds for opposing forcible proselytization in public facilities.
I think that the usage of science by these organizations demonstrate their mindset. They know that their understanding of God, the Bible, and reality is correct, so then the objective is to find the evidence that supports the truth. Homosexuality causes harm, for homosexual relations are sinful and wrong. The same thinking is behind opposition to evolution.
Evolution presents a greater threat in their minds. In fact, Phillip Johnson argues that acceptance of evolution has undermined the Bible and therefore contributed to the acceptance of homosexual relationships. The Institute for Creation Research runs a museum, which contains a tree that shows the supposed fruits of evolution. Homosexuality is mentioned among genocide, slavery, child abuse, and abortion. In a very real sense, these groups consider evolution to be the linchpin of the culture war with homosexuality being a side battle.
You make a good point about evolution being a linchpin. But I’m not sure I agree that it is THE linchpin but rather just one of the more visible battles in the culture war.
I think the problems that fundamentalists have is that they insist on a literal interpretation of EVERYTHING, including a 144 hour creation, talking snake, talking donkey, the sun standing still for hours, completely flooded planet, a woman magically turning into a pillar of salt, etc. That leaves them proclaiming that when Adam left the garden of Eden 6,000 years ago, he had to deal with T-Rex and pteredactyls.
Fortunately, this sort of argument isn’t very compelling and eventually – if they hold to positions clearly contrary to scientific evidence – they lose credibility. The reason they are fighting so hard on this issue is because its one where they seem the nuttiest. You can argue “God hates the homos” and never have to prove evidence. But when you say “the world is only 6,000 years old”, you don’t leave a lot of wiggle room. If they allow science to present its evidence, then their whole position as the purveyor of truth just goes out the window.
But they could just as easily lose on other grounds as well.
Maybe people will find it harder to believe that “taking away gay people’s health care is moral” than to believe in a talking snake. After all, the Garden of Eden was long ago and far away (and maybe they had talking snakes there) while Aunt Clara’s wife Susan has cancer today and needs health care.
It may turn out that the nutty absolutist literal stories will be believed longer than the cruel social demands of fundamentalism.
It certainly doesn’t tax my idea of God to think that He could make a donkey talk, but I am amazed at the number of people, some acquaintances of mine, who believe that civilization is 6000 years old (though I don’t know anyone who thinks the universe is that young). Nothing I find on (or off) the planet gives me any problem with my belief in God. Quite the contrary, the more I see the more amazed I am. I do not understand the need to put forth this 6000 year thing.
I should point out that those who believe this are trusting in some calculations supposedly determined from the genealogies and misc events in scripture. It doesn’t say that man was created on such and such a date BC, nor do I think God ever meant to convey such information. The Bible is a book of faith. It would take no faith to trust in a God who provided irrefutable evidence by, for example, providing pulsar coordinates, or explanations of atomic structures, or indeed the exact age of the universe and man. People who do believe in a 6000 year old civilization (or universe) are, in my opinion, missing the point entirely and bringing incredulous disbelief toward God which should instead be aimed at them.
David