Friday, May 31, 2013

Erick Erickson Isn't Just a Misogynist, He's Also A Luddite

I'm sure by now you're all familiar with Fox News contributor,  Erick Erickson's idiotic comments about evil female breadwinners. While Erick is (rightfully) being thrashed by people all across the intertubes for his non-misogyny, I want to make sure we don't overlook another one of his major character flaws:

“I’m so used to liberals telling conservatives that they’re anti-science,” Erickson explained. “But liberals who defend this and say it is not a bad thing are very anti-science. When you look at biology, when you look at the natural world, the roles of a male and a female in society and in other animals, the male typically is the dominant role. The female, it’s not antithesis, or it’s not competing, it’s a complimentary role.”

Yes, Erick feels completely comfortable lecturing liberals about science. You know science, right? That oh so coveted and revered subject by all right-wingers.

Here's Mr. Erickson last year, being all sadfaced that the media was picking on poor Marco Rubio for thinking the Earth was created in only a few thousand years:

Marco Rubio is getting beaten up by the press for not decisively and convincingly saying he thinks the world is billions of years old. The press gave Barack Obama a pass for largely the same answer. This issue has become the new litmus test in the media for conservative politicians. Believing what was believed to be literally true for a few thousand years is now nutty.

Yeah, what's the big deal anyway? It's not like something could be ever proven to be wrong via new information or technology or anything.  
Christian homeschool kids, often taught that the world is not as old as some believe and who routinely kick the rear ends of the ivy prep kids in academics, are considered stupid.
 Imagine that.

 Erick doesn't appear to score very highly when it comes to geology, but let's see if he fares any better at biology:

I reject evolution for the sake of evolution and reject that life on this planet, let alone the existence of this universe, is some random act. I reject that we are little better than the animals we evolved from because I reject that we evolved from anything other than God’s own mind. We were created in his image. We did not evolve into it. The only people certain in their belief on this matter are those who accept theory as fact and Truth as mythology.

Guess not.

To wrap things up, here are a few other things Mr. Erickson actually believes in:
 
Yes, I believe there was an Adam and I believe there was an Eve.

Yes, I believe there were two cities named Sodom and Gomorrah and yes I do believe they were destroyed
for rampant sin including deviating from God’s intentions sexually.

Yes, I believe there was a man named Noah who spent 100 years building a giant boat and I do believe there was a great flood and the survivors of which were all on that boat.

And yes, I do believe there was a man named Jonah who was swallowed up by a great big fish and survived.

Yeah....I'm gonna have to say that, as one of the major opinion leaders of a party that's still coming to terms with that whole Enlightenment Era thing,  Erick really needs to never, ever make an appeal to science when trying to justify his hatred for women.




*Okay, to be fair, Erick does (grudgingly) say that he believes the Earth is indeed billions of years old. All those years at CNN clearly weakened his resolve.

No comments:

Post a Comment

ads