Proposed Legislation Shows True Meaning of Intolerance

A massive crowd turned out Friday evening at the University of Oklahoma’s McCasland Field house to hear controversial author Richard Dawkins speak. Dawkins is author of “The God Delusion” and “The Selfish Gene,” a world-renowned evolutionary biologist and a fervent atheist, and people of all ages, colors and types were there to hear his lecture, “The Purpose of Purpose.” The doors opened at 5:30 p.m., and when I arrived fifteen minutes later, three-quarters of the field house was already full.

Although the lecture was stimulating enough, my attention kept returning to a piece of paper that had been handed to me as I walked through the entrance.  This piece of paper, which became the comedic introduction to Dawkins lecture, was a proposed piece of legislation by state Rep. Todd Thomsen, R-Ada, a House Resolution “opposing the invitation (by the University of Oklahoma) to Richard Dawkins to speak on campus.”

Richard Dawkins

Needless to say, I had some issues with the document. Let me preface my analysis with some points that any Oklahoman should already know. It is evident that some people of faith in Oklahoma are resistant to evolution and also wish to see a form of creationism taught alongside evolution in our school systems.  There are other people in Oklahoma that see evolution as no threat to their faith. For example, many scientists support their empirical work on this physical earth as such and have religious beliefs that deal with non-empirical thoughts, behaviors, etc.  They are able to distinguish between what can be theorized by the scientific method and what can be theorized by faith.  I am not supporting one side or the other in this article.  I am, however, pointing out how minds that are closed off to new possibilities are not only a hindrance to society, but also, appear to be ignorant to that society.

Here is a sample from the beginning of the 1st Session of the 52nd Legislature House Resolution 1014 piece as proposed by Thomsen:

Whereas, not only has the Department of Zoology at the University of Oklahoma been engaged in one-sided indoctrination of an unproven and unpopular theory but has made an effort to brand all thinking in dissent of this theory as anti-intellectual and backward rather than nurturing such free thinking and allowing a free discussion of all ideas which is the primary purpose of a university …

First of all, never have I ever heard of evolution as an unpopular theory.  Yes, technically speaking, it is unproven because no working theory can be proven exactly. But, it is a theory that has survived 200 years of new thought and continues to gather massive amounts of evidence from a diversity of fields, including genetics, neuroscience, ecology, biology, etc.  The theory of evolution has allowed for further scientific development, and we are seeing those advancements every day.  Also, I, being a student at the University of Oklahoma, am proud to say that I have never felt indoctrinated, ever.  The University of Oklahoma offers a variety of cultural events, scientific symposia and academic lectures to cover every corner of social thought.  I commend OU on its efforts to support free thinking and the diversity of that thought.  Not only was this “Darwin 2009 Project” aimed at the celebration of a free thinker, Charles Darwin, but the series itself was aimed at offering students a range of discussion on the matters of the human species.  I doubt that so many departments, from religious studies to psychology, from history of science to zoology, would have sponsored the Dawkins lecture had it not been for the education of the campus and Norman community.  Here is another sample of the resolution:

Whereas, the University of Oklahoma … has invited as a public speaker on campus, Richard Dawkins of Oxford University, whose published opinions, as represented in his 2006 book “The God Delusion,” and public statements on the theory of evolution demonstrate an intolerance for cultural diversity and diversity of thinking and are views that are not shared and are not representative of the thinking of a majority of the citizens of Oklahoma …

Not only is evolutionary conversation not an example of intolerance for cultural diversity, but Thomsen is being intolerant of cultural diversity by even proposing such a resolution as this one.  Furthermore, I doubt that any true random sampling of Oklahomans was conducted to state that the viewpoints held by Dawkins are not of the majority.  In fact, from the thousands that received Dawkins on Friday night with a standing ovation, it seems that Thomsen may have spoken too soon.  Either way, it is not in the interest of the University of Oklahoma to uphold and represent ideas that are of the majority.  It is the requirement of a secular institution to give a voice to all ideas, so that majorities can better understand minorities, and so that diversity can be celebrated.

By abusing his political authority and accusing the University of Oklahoma of false allegations, I believe that Thomsen is not representative of the true values that Oklahomans stand for: Acceptance and not intolerance, free thought and not myopia, support of a secular education and not condemnation of such, and being generally well-informed rather than quick to judge.  I understand where the tension arises, don’t read me wrong.  Oklahoma was the only state to be soaked in red in every county in the most recent presidential election.  I understand that we are the buckle of the Bible Belt and that many believe evolution impinges on their personal faith.  But, evolution does not say there is no God, and Dawkins doesn’t say there isn’t a God either.  He simply states that the existence of God cannot be scientifically proven or unproven either way.  So, technically, Dawkins admits, he is an agnostic who leans more to the atheist persuasion.

It is curious that I feel the need to bring up the above argument. Dawkins’ presentation, is in fact, just one unique perspective in the wide spectrum of guest speakers and presentations that OU offers to its students and surrounding community. With the political and religious atmosphere that Oklahoma implies, I guess I shouldn’t be surprised.

• Related link: Dawkins Survives in Oklahoma  |  Inside Higher Ed
• Related link: On Dawkins in Oklahoma  |  Mainstream Baptist