Obama’s Partisan Science
In a recent video appearance , Barrack Obama croons for nearly three minutes about the virtues of science. I’m sure I speak for a large proportion of our readers when I say that this has certainly left me with mixed feelings.
Certainly the “science to prevent global warming” would be an admirable pursuit, were there any merit to the claim that the atmosphere is heating up. Obama also calls for the “research to find life saving cures,” which is – again – innocuous enough, providing they don’t sacrifice any babies to do it.
Yet, while speaking of science’s ability to “protect our troops and confront bioterror and weapons of mass destruction,” I cannot help but worry that Obama is neglecting other, equally important sources of terror. What about chemical terror? Or conventional terror? Or the terror you get from reading a good Stephen King novel? The President says nothing of how science will protect us from these arguably less glamorous types of terror.
This new found love of science is worringly undemocratic as well. He advocates ”listening to what our scientists have to say, even when it’s inconvenient. Especially when it’s inconvenient.” Unfortunately Obama makes it impossible to ignore the reference to Al Gore, whose interests are so so inextricably tied to the globe getting warmer that one suspects he might be the chief polluter.
Obama carries himself in a way which worryingly evokes former President Kennedy. His condescending use of words to express himself and reference to the Moon landing is enough to paint him as a flag waving member of the Kennedy fan club. But Kennedy was a Catholic and a fornicator. Is that the kind of standard we should be setting for our leaders? Indeed, Obama even goes so far as to say ”leaders like President Kennedy… inspired us to push the boundaries of the known world, and achieve the impossible”.
The President’s infatuation with science is cause for concern. ”Today more than ever science holds the key to our survival as a planet, and our security and prosperity as a nation. It’s time once again to put science at the top of the agenda.” At the top? What about the economy? And education? And what about Jesus? Surely he deserves to be up there too? This is science without boundaries, without moral purpose. It is ’scienceism’, easily my least favorite of the isms.
He concludes by salivating over the promises of unfettered scientific inquiriy: ”if we have the vision to believe and invest in the things unseen, then we can lead the world into a new era of peace and prosperity”. But unless those “things unseen” include Jesus and His vision for America, count me out.
Related posts:
- US Science and Tech Advisor: Too Many People On Earth, Cull the Herd In a statement bound to encourage President Barack Obama's enthusiastic expansion of the United States' newest export -- the Obama Culture of Death -- Administration...
- Should Christians Support Obama? We've argued long and hard over this, here at the Paliban Daily. Should Christians support Obama, or not? The answer may surprise you....
- Texans Wrangle Over Science and History Texts Texan evangelicals are fighting to change history, starting with the textbooks. Why does this matter to the rest of us?...
- Pat Robertson Praises Obama, Bashes Bush In a CNN interview with Suzanne Malveaux, Pat Robertson praises Obama and slams outgoing "Christian" President Bush!...
- Obama’s Nudist White House On his first full day as President, Barack Obama overturned one of the basic standards of decency upheld by former President George W. Bush: requiring...
Join the discussion in
If you want anyone ever to take you seriously, I suggest you leave out stuff like “were there any merit to the claim that the atmosphere is heating up” and “Kennedy was a Catholic….”
First, there is plenty of evidence that the atmosphere is heating up; see http://www.pewclimate.org/global-warming-basics/facts_and_figures/temp_ghg_trends/temp.cfm for starters. Or read the newspaper: Arctic ice no longer extends as far as it did 50 or 100 years ago; mountaintops that were glaciated 50 years ago are now bare. There are a few climatologists who argue that global warming is not, as far as we can tell, caused by human activity; there are NO climatologists who argue that it’s not happening at all.
Second, “Kennedy was a Catholic….” So what? Are you really suggesting that Catholics are stupid or evil or both? Because if you are, your opinions are worthless. Prejudice is the hallmark of stupidity.
I can’t speak for our friend Palisaid (he’ll defend his own work in due time), but if you bothered to read anything beyond the Huff N Puff Post, you’d know that 44% of Americans (up from only 34% less than a year ago) know that “global warming” is pure bunk. It’s one of our featured articles, for crying out loud! http://www.palibandaily.com/2009/01/19/44-of-americans-know-global-warming-is-a-myth/
As for Kennedy being a Catholic, well, he was! Catholics aren’t Christians, they worship Mary and “saints” and crackers. How intelligent can someone be, if he worships crackers and the vessel that bore our Savior, while ignoring Jesus? That’s like praising the oven and ignoring the chef!
Jenny,
May I compliment you on this fine oven analogy which you have happened across of late? Very apt.
Mr. Kelly,
“Prejudice is the hallmark of stupidity”… Interesting etymology, ‘prejudice’ has, don’t you think? It obviously means to judge something prematurely, without gathering in all the evidence. It’s often done by accident. Hmm, just musing.
In any case, friend, I see that you failed to criticize my labeling of Kennedy as a fornicator. Is that something you would contend too?