Could Ben Carson be right about bestiality?

Dr. Carson, retired pediatric neurosurgeon from Johns Hopkins Hospital, was the first to successfully separate twins conjoined at the head. Celebrated and brilliant, he is an outspoken critic of the political correctness which has eroded free speech in the United States. Recently, his fearlessness may have been somewhat tempered by the uproar of the nation’s political elite. They chastised him for linking homosexuality to pedophilia and bestiality. On the popular television show Hannity, Carson said the following in defense of natural marriage:

Marriage is between a man and a woman, it’s a well established fundamental pillar of society …. And no group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA [North American Man/Boy Love Association], be they people who believe in bestiality, it doesn’t matter what they are. They don’t get to change the definition, so it’s not something that’s against gays, it’s against anybody who wants to come along and change the fundamental definitions of pillars of society–it has significant ramifications.

The uproar from the LGBT community and their allies was swift and severe. Dr. Carson was forced to cancel the commencement address he was scheduled to make at Johns Hopkins University. Student and faculty pressure was overwhelming. He apologized for any offense his words brought, but seems to be standing by his basic opposition to those groups who are seeking to redefine the nature of human sexuality and marriage.

Whether or not you agree with Carson’s word choice, consider the heart of his assertion. It’s well founded.

Evolutionary science is not simply science, it is an ideology, a comprehensive worldview. We learn the science of evolution in biology classes, but few acknowledge that evolution is a dogma, a belief system that affects every area of life.

Dr. Randy Thornhill is one exception. This biology professor at the University of New Mexico has boldly stated what few have being willing to concede: “Every feature of every living thing, including human beings, has an underlying evolutionary background. That’s not a debatable matter.”[1] Thornhill’s view goes beyond the evolution-as-accepted-science position. He says the “fact” of evolution implies that everything has its own evolutionary story. History is explained by evolution. So, too, are psychology, sociology, and humanities … and every other field of study. Evolutionism defines our understanding of human life and sexuality.

The science is not debatable, Thornhill claims. Why is that? Because the belief system is assumed to be true.

Philosopher of Science Dr. Michael Ruse has said just that. He admits that evolution is not merely a science, but a religion that seeks to replace the Judeo-Christian worldview that created Western civilization. Evolution as a belief system is destroying the Western world. It is eroding the hope that Judeo-Christian theism offers humankind. Ruse writes,

Evolution came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity…. [It] is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion – a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality.[2]

Yes, evolution is not merely science; it is a religion, a moral and metaphysical framework that infects all of life. Thus, there is a logic to naturalistic philosophy that impacts our understanding of sexuality.

This logic includes:

–          We are merely animals.

–          Sex is simply physical, at its root a biological urge.

–          The end is a hook-up culture, sex as entertainment, recreation. The “one-night stand” has degenerated further; now it’s “hook up and walk away.”

–          Sexual lawlessness prevails.

Naturalism is a denial of our humanity and our transcendent sexual nature, the feminine and the masculine. There are not and cannot be any moral or metaphysical limitations on our sexuality. There is no priority given to conventional, lifelong commitment of marriage between a man and a woman.

This is the reason that atheism is so hotly and passionately defended. It allows people to define their own sexual terms and to have sex without moral boundaries. In fact, I believe atheists embrace atheism for moral rather than metaphysical reasons. Without a moral universe, there are no boundaries on sexual behavior.

–          Darrow Miller

[1] http://www.worldmag.com/2000/03/darwin_s_dirty_secret

[2] As quoted by Nancy Pearcey, Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity, pg 172

Print this page