Feature Column: "Designed Liberty"

By R. Josiah Magnuson

We as Americans today are in the midst of a worldviews war - a war between two philosophies of what the nature of life is and how things really work. One battle in this war is the struggle over how freedom can best be created and maintained.

The Declaration of Independence tells us, “All men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights…. To secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

Karx Marx in contrast believed in Communism, which, he agreed, "abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality."

Another way to express "unalienable rights" or "eternal truths" is absolutes. In the Christian worldview, these absolutes are exemplified in the Ten Commandments. For instance, “Thou shalt not kill” is the right to life, “Thou shalt not steal” is the right to property and “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor” is the right to a fair trial. Everyone possesses these rights, and these rights are unalienable. They are the moral Law of God.

Societies based on the Christianity as the Bible directs (i.e. based on the Biblical absolutes and unalienable rights) have historically been free, republican organisms. This is because government under the Biblical model exists only to protect one from harm. Government is not inherently supreme over its citizens, as it must not overreach God's moral boundaries which apply to everyone.Christ affirmed this idea when he declared, "Render to Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.(Mark 12:17, etc.)" Under the Biblical model, there are some things which positively cannot belong to Caesar.

On the other hand, Evolution teaches that there are no absolutes. Instead, it declares the universe to be one of change and chance, continuously morphing all its inhabitants and their ideals to match the need of the “fittest” race to survive and dominate. Even the idea of fitness eventually becomes ethereal, for Evolution has no prior intention of what fitness should be. “Fitness” is whatever is convenient to the perceived master race.

No individual rights can exist under Evolution. The right to life is contradicted, because Evolution is "each creature for itself." Killing is actually encouraged, because one must destroy rivals if one is to survive. The right to liberty is contradicted, because if enslaving others gives one an Evolutionary advantage, what is to oppose it? The right to property is virtually contradicted, since stealing would arguably give one more resources and energy in the battle for livelihood. The right to a fair trial disappears, as there is no need for justice in a world which knows only randomness and whim.

In short, government as viewed from the Evolutionary perspective creates itself, makes its own rules, and can only exist to dominate. If the State sees fit to grant or loan limited liberty to its weak, scrawny, less-evolved subjects, it is only to make them fall at its feet in gratitude. The State thus empowers itself further. This almighty “fit” State exists not to protect, but to subdue.

The only freedom which the worldview of Evolution grants is a twisted, distorted freedom. It is a freedom for Stalin to drive a sledgehammer into Trotsky’s head. It is a freedom for Hitler to force millions into death camps. It is a freedom for Mao to torture and kill anyone who would even dare to have his hairdo.

Evolutionary naturalism and the relative morality it produces are nothing to be defended. Rather, they should be opposed by anyone appreciating the American heritage of liberty and lawful, composed government.