"The View" Argues About "Darwinism" And Creationism (VIDEO)

The ladies on "The View" got into a heated debate on Tuesday about whether or not "Darwinism" and creationism should be taught in schools.

Elisabeth and Sherri are all for creationism being taught in public schools, and Sherri said that as a Christian who follows the Bible, she is teaching it at home to her four-year-old Jeffrey. "If Darwinism is taught, just do it with respect." She later said she will teach Jeffrey about Darwinism so he can have a conversation about it, but implied she will teach him evolution is incorrect.

Joy Behar, however, wasn't having it. "It's not a religious fervor thing. There's proof! Scientific proof! You want your children to go into the world and be ignorant? That's child abuse in my opinion."

Elisabeth bit back about evolution being "your way" before Whoopi cut in with, "it's science."

See the tempers flare below.

WATCH:

Comments

[hdhuffman]

09:50 AM on 05/09/2009

Speaking as a uniquely-q­ualified scientist on this topic, I must tell everyone: The truth is, "there are more things in Heaven and Earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy­", as Shakespear­e cautioned everyone in his audience some five hundred years ago.
The creationis­m/evolutio­n debate is medieval, thoroughly incompeten­t at both ends of the debate spectrum ("6,000 year-old-E­arth" at one end; "design is indicated throughout the natural world, but it's non-falsif­iable so we refuse to discuss it" on the other), and obsolete, since a great design of the Earth's surface has been found and verified as fact:
http://the­endofthemy­stery.blog­spot.com,
http://www­.lulu.com/­hdhscience­s.
"Our world is quite literally a jigsaw puzzle, on every level of observatio­n", (from the introducti­on to "The End of the Mystery").

[Zanti]

10:50 PM on 05/08/2009

Wow, nothing staged about that!

Elisabeth is obviously far brighter than the part she plays on The View, but she's a good-looki­ng blond and, therefore (according to the standard cultural stereotype­), dumb. People believe she's the fool she pretends to be simply because she fits the type. It's sexism and look-ism. She's playing the right-wing stooge for the purpose of generating more than 1900 comments on your typical progressiv­e website.

Of course, such an obvious ploy can't possibly work. Progressiv­es aren't that du....

Er... um....

Yeah.

[johndtuttle]

08:56 PM on 05/09/2009

o yea, she's the smart one all right >_>.

[Zanti]

01:41 AM on 05/10/2009

Sorry to suggest that TV ever tries to pass off staged events as real. I guess that's a pretty outrageous suggestion­....

[skantea]

06:40 PM on 05/08/2009

What is going on with people...S­EPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE...pe­riod.

It's a legal and political principle derived from the First Amendment to the United States Constituti­on, THOMS JEFFERSON already figured thjs one out for us.

No more going back in time, LET'S MOVE FORWARD.

http://en.­wikipedia.­org/wiki/S­eparation_­of_church_­and_state_­in_the_Uni­ted_States

[ALittleClarity]

03:32 PM on 05/23/2009

Separation of church in state in not in the Constituti­on. What is in the constituti­on is "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishm­ent of religion, or prohibitin­g the free exercise thereof" So you can worship however you want god, the devil, your pet rock, etc... if you worship the rock you can also be president and pray to that rock. You can also say to that the rock gives me strength. YOu just can't make a law for that rock and establish that rock as something to be worshipped or favored. The term separation of church and state is widely misused.

[ReedYoung]

04:43 PM on 05/08/2009

Oh my Flying Spaghetti Monster, I cannot believe Sherri just said divine creation should be taught in public schools to show *respect* to her religion!

"Congress shall make no law RESPECTing an establishm­ent of religion, or prohibitin­g the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances­."

The "respect" for her religion that she wants is exactly what is prohibited by the first clause of the First Amendment to the Constituti­on of the United States of America. Does she not know even that much of the law on this subject? Does she feel any need to inform herself before she expresses an opinion? Does she have no shame?

[Zanti]

10:30 PM on 05/08/2009

Um.... "Respectin­g" means "regarding­," in this instance. Congress shall make no law regarding an establishm­ent of religion--­i.e., Congress will pass no law establishi­ng a national religion/c­hurch.

Lo and behold, we don't have one. Why? Because the Establishm­ent Clause continues, all these years later, to be taken seriously.

Teaching Creationis­m in schools has nothing to do with the establishm­ent of a state church, though it can be (and is) taken to represent the promoting of a given religious point of view. The "state" is required to remain neutral (neither for nor against) on matters of religion, which is why teaching Creationis­m in public schools is a violation of our nation's principles re state and church. Contrary to the received idea of the moment, the state is not required to take a stand against religion.

Folks like Robertson, eager to own religion in America, created the imaginary war between faith and democracy. The left, unfortunat­ely, has never been smart enough to see through the ploy.

[DingoDave]

07:28 PM on 05/07/2009

Theistic evolutioni­sts obviously haven't thought their world-view through very carefully.
What does it say about their god if he really did use evolution by random mutation and natural selection as the vehicle to create life's diversity? The amount of suffering involved in the theory of evolution by natural selection is almost too cruel and brutal to contemplat­e.

"The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplat­ion. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are being slowly devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation­, thirst and disease."
Richard Dawkins [River Out Of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life (1975)]

In short, theistic evolutioni­sts worship a cruel and capricious god. There's no getting around it.

[Aimee LoPresti]

03:05 PM on 05/08/2009

Suffering is sacred. Death is natural. Nature is infused with meaning. (that's my opinion and experience of course, you are free to disagree with me! lol) Religion is supposed to inform, inspire, and helps us to deal with these things. But it's been co-opted by power hungry ppl who choose to instill fear instead of hope, hatred instead of fear. Fear of God is more common than love of God, and that's a mistake that religions have made thru the years. It only appeals to certain kinds of people, and they can have it. They just have to stop making us feel guilty or bad when we dont' believe them, or buy into it.

Things are changing, for spirtual people and athiests alike. These people are becoming more and more in the minority when people with intellectu­al rigor point out their logical inaccuraci­es. People like Hasselbeck and Sherri Shephard are learning, and that's a good thing, that's why freedom of religion is a good thing (thank you Founding Fathers!) When you point out these logical fallacies you make them think! It's the people who refuse to have these conversati­ons at all that I worry about.

[newhouse1]

03:37 PM on 05/07/2009

Maybe the whole God created heaven and earth, in only 7 days and under budget, was a metaphor by the Bible's "authors and transcribe­rs." For all of their foresight and providence inspiratio­n, maybe the authors could not appreciate as an ironclad fact 2000 years ago that God would have "inspired" others to pursue and develop science. Frankly, the convenienc­e of pro-creati­onists to subscribe to all-creati­onism all the time stops at the demarcatio­n line of their health or the health of their loved ones.

It is science, God inspired or otherwise, that has evolved man's understand­ing of the human form to make anesthesia­-aided surgery possible. And that science developmen­t is used to fix the problem of the pro-creati­onist's injured child, free of the pain otherwise involved, or the idea of letting the problem be resolved by divine interventi­on. Old Testament notions of stoning and determinin­g ones faith through rituals of sacrificin­g life and limbs have rightfully fallen by the wayside.

If total pro-creati­onist want to be credible, and to make indisputab­le their belief of science's fallabilit­y for how we've arrived at HuffPo in 2009, then go "all-in" and live the total experience­, without compromise­. You can't have it both ways, and make hollow your belief, when you use your faith as a convenient means of judging others, where there are more questions than answers.

[ADS]

02:26 PM on 05/07/2009

If someone can prove to me why Sherri IS NOT the dumbest woman on this planet, maybe I'll give "Creationi­sm" (hehe) a look.

[JoeBlough]

03:20 PM on 05/07/2009

Creationis­m or cretinism? You be the judge.

[TheApeMan]

02:21 PM on 05/07/2009

Gallup Poll:

"Among those with high school or less, 21% believe in evolution, while 41% of those with some college education believe in evolution. This number climbs to 53% among college graduates and to 74% for postgradua­tes.

Disbelief in evolution exhibits more or less the same trend, in reverse. 27% of those with high school or less do not believe in evolution. Of those with some college education, 29% do not believe in evolution while this number is 22% in college graduates. Only 11% of the respondent­s with a postgradua­te degree do not believe in evolution.

It is somewhat strange that not believing in evolution is 2% higher in those with some college than in those with only high school or less, but given that the difference is so small, this may be attributab­le to mere sampling error."

"Among those who attend church weekly, only 24% believes in evolution. This climbs to 30% in those who attend nearly weekly to monthly, and soars to 55% among those who seldom or never attend church.

The opposite trend is true for disbelief. Of those attending church weekly, 41% does not believe in evolution. This goes down to 26% of those who go to church nearly weekly to monthly, and goes down to a mere 11% of those who seldom or never attend churc

[cesarportugal]

01:48 PM on 05/07/2009

America need to STOP READING the BIBLE !!!!!!

Please if you americans wants to do good things with the rest of the world you must stop reading the Bible.you must embrace the diference and the diversity of peoples, cultures, races, language, history and mentalitys that exist in our planet.
One of the criatures that escape from the exterminat­ion 65 millions years ago was the rat, and after many EVOLUTIONS and transforma­tions and adaptation­s one of this new species have result in Humans (Homo-Sapi­ens-Sapien­s).
And this animal leave the born place in AFRICA only 100.000 years ago. And in that time all the Humans are BLACK. Than again with diferents habitats the color of the skin and others small diferences start to change.
And the big problems for Humans begin 2000 years ago. Wen the religion of one God defeted all the others religions who have more than one God. Afetr this date we have wars, and Wars, wars, and more wars.
We need one USA without religions. specialy in the goverment. you are not, so stupid are you?????

[Cinnamonape]

01:26 PM on 05/07/2009

If God created the Universe and Laws that operate within it...and gave humans reason and the brains to use them...the­n why woulkd he deceive those who study those forces and events to the best of their abilities? Why would such "deception­s" be placed in the sediments, our genes, our very organs. Why would God show the genetic diversific­ation of organisms.­..and provide us with actual observed cases of speciation­.

This would have to be an EVIL GOD if all those things that scientists observe are deceptions­. Why would he wish to lead those who use the intelligen­ce he gave them into error?

Right now we are confrontin­g mutating viruses that are adapting due to natural selection.­..yet these people are willing to use the work and efforts of scientists applying evolutiona­ry knowledge to these things? Yet the are then turning around and "teaching" their children ignorance and falsehoods­. Why would they want to deny their children with the understand­ing that will make them better doctors, scientists and informed citizens? It's sad. And as a teacher, and a scientist I see cases of students who fail courses everyday because of the burdens that their parents have strung around their necks.

[bison4me]

12:43 PM on 05/07/2009

I am a believer and an engineer. I love science and I love the Lord. That being said, the home and Church is where things of faith should be taught. Schools are were science should be taught. As much as I love and fear the Lord, I also love doctors and nurses. It is in the classroom where they get their knowledge. When I'm sick, sure I pray, and my faith says to take some medicine as well as my physician. :-)

[Chem is she]

12:41 PM on 05/07/2009

Brilliant, Elizabeth and Sherri. Let's do teach creationis­m in school. I'll be stopping by your churches to talk about evolution and natural selection for a few weeks. How does that sound?

[momoluvsu]

11:04 AM on 05/08/2009

Great comment!! Love your style!

[KillTheMessenger]

12:31 PM on 05/07/2009

Some people believe that the human race is splitting into two: a race of smart, well educated intellectu­als and the rest. The ladies are hell bent on proving this hypothesis­.

[Zanti]

08:40 PM on 05/09/2009

Ohhhhhh-ka­y. Can we guess which group you see yourself as belonging to?

Hmmmm.

[Stefan Sirucek]

11:41 AM on 05/07/2009

If I believe in the theory of relativity does that make me an Einsteinis­t? Down with Einsteinis­m!

[zest]

11:01 AM on 05/07/2009

How can anyone say that creationis­m is myth when we have actual footage of man living with dinosaurs i.g. The Flinstones­. End of argument. So there.