The Great American Debate

The war between religion and science came to a head in 1925 in a rural Tennessee courthouse. John Scopes had introduced evolution to his public school students—a violation of Tennessee law. The trial brought in two legal heavyweights who fought it out. Scopes was eventually convicted. While the legal argument was between the State of Tennessee and this teacher, the root of the debate was between science and religion. That conflict had been going on for some time, and the trial was the culmination of an effort by conservative Christians to silence Darwin’s “godless heresy.”

The debate continues to take place in less public arenas throughout the nation. With the rise of science and the scientific method, many Christians feel threatened.

The “monkey trial” as it was called, did not end the argument. Right up to today many fundamentalists continue to reject the findings of evolution. Around the nation there are museums and theme parks featuring so-called “biblical facts.” One such exhibit shows humans and dinosaurs living in the same neighborhood at the same time. There are continual efforts to locate the garden of Eden or the remains of Noah’s ark. There are TV evangelists whose constant theme revolves around “proving” that evolution is a satanic hoax.

While this old debate may still be alive in the nation’s backwaters, science is now been challenged by an unexpected non-religious source, Trumpism! The world’s scientists have made it clear that climate change has produced the catastrophic reality labeled “global warming.” What is more, the scientists have identified human activity as its primary cause. Every effort made by Congress or the states to deal with the problem in ways that might eventually make life on this planet livable, has been ridiculed by President Trump. What is more, Trump has tragically withdrawn the United States from the promising Paris Accords an international proposal that took the problem seriously and suggested a way out.

Why has Trump made war on science? His commitment does not appear to be human survival or the sanctity of the planet, but the protection of the fossil fuel industry and its influence on the American economy. It is clear that the longer we wait to take definite steps to save the planet, the greater the jeopardy. Continuing to pump millions of tons of death-dealing gases into the atmosphere spells ultimate disaster. So say the world’s climatologists.

More immediately, Trump has gone to war with the nation’s scientists as the world faces the devastating pandemic labeled “Covid-19.” He insists that the scientific findings must give way to economic concerns. In recent days he has been more attentive to America’s medical community, but he has set the boundary of the battle with the statement, “the cure may be more dangerous than the disease.” Science tells us that the cure is to continue the nationwide shut-down. This not only has to do with the demand that we stay home and observe social distancing, but also involves the continued closing of America’s businesses as well as practically every public facility. The cure may involve something as simple as wearing cloth masks (Beth, our New Orleans daughter, has made and shipped us a box of them). Trump has declined to wear a face covering because it might interfere with his image. Here is simply another example of how his egomania is both despicable and dangerous.

Despite medical advice, Trump had been pushing an unproved treatment without knowing its danger let alone its effectiveness. He won’t wear a cloth mask but will encourage taking an untested medicine. “What do you have to lose?” Only your life!

He continues to say that a vital decision is in the offing. We can only guess that it has to do with reopening American’s businesses and putting the nation back to work. But the medical community has warned that a premature return to normal life risks the return of the pandemic. How will the decision be made and who will make it? Trump is certain the decision will be his alone and will be made in an attempt to restore the economy, ignoring the advice of his own medical experts.

Trump has set the battle line, but the question remains, shall the decision be made on the basis of the best scientific judgment or on what seems to be best—in the short run—for the economy. So now we have a 2ist version of the Scopes trial with a new anti-science antagonist.