Judge This: Is It Wrong To Rip The Creationist Introduction Out Of Ray Comfort’s Propaganda Version Of The Origin Of Species?

Creationist Ray Comfort has put together a version of The Origin of Species which contains an introduction (which you can read here) which falsely blames Nazism on Darwin, promotes creationist pseudoscience, and lies about the scientific credibility of evolution.  Yesterday I relayed a video in which Kirk Cameron touts plans to distribute 50,000 copies of this book on college campuses in November.  RichardDawkins.net recommends ripping out the introductions and donating the books to charity:

There’s something we can do though. We can amass as many of these books as possible, remove the 50 page intro, and then donate perfectly good copies of ‘Origin of Species’ to schools, libraries, and Goodwill. We can actually make this into something positive.

If you are in college, then you are in a good position to help. Check your campus on November 19th, and if you see a group distributing copies of the book, then get as many as you can. Get a copy for yourself, ask if you can have extra copies for your friends, ask your friends to go ask for copies, and ask other people you see carrying the book if you can have their copy.

This is a shameful thing that Kirk Cameron and the Banana Guy are doing by altering another person’s book in order to push their agenda. But we can help to restore the book to how it was intended and keep young minds from being brainwashed by misinformation.

PZ Myers makes a similar recommendation.

In reply to me, Justin, of Christian in College, characterizes the Dawkins’s site’s plan as censorship and asks whether I want to go so far as to promote censorship:

According to the Richard Dawkins site, the “plan” proposed is to rip out the introduction… in other words, censorship. Do you really think that is the best plan?

I want to take the question seriously and be sure I do not just reply in a partisan, biased way.  So, in the meantime, I want to know what you think and then I’ll reply myself in the comments section at some point.  (Hopefully after there have been numerous thoughts from others offered!)

So, is this censorship or not?  And even if it is censorship, is it ethically acceptable, obligatory, immoral, or what?

Your Thoughts?

"I applaud your approach and recommend, if you like, “Rogerian Argument” which does - as ..."

Making Arguments Less Tediously Repetitive, Contentious, ..."
"Perhaps this idea's time has come. I like your logical and convincing presentation. I have ..."

Making Arguments Less Tediously Repetitive, Contentious, ..."
"Yes! We need methods to help us have conversations with people we disagree with. Since ..."

Making Arguments Less Tediously Repetitive, Contentious, ..."
"Snoke is not well developed because he does not need to be. We already know ..."

Religion and Philosophy in The Last ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment