Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} The creation of controversy A case study of ''And Tango Makes Three''. by Craig A. Young The Anti-Science Extremism of the Left. President Joe Biden nominated a man to be his assistant secretary of Health and Human Services who thinks, dresses, and acts like he’s a real woman. The party of science is willing to ignore science when it needs to cater to a voting contingency—the Alphabet People. When I mentioned the anti-absurdity of this nomination, someone posted the following in the name of science: “Transgender” occurs also among animals. So much for bringing science into the equation! Focus on the qualifications of the person, not on his friends as the past administration did. Here is my comment: So does rape, leaving the infirm to die, and often killing a weakened offspring to be fed to the stronger offspring. This is what animals do. (Maybe this is why Leftists support killing unborn babies—because they are animals.) There is no such thing as transgenderism among animals. What dog has whacked off his penis and added breast implants? If Richard Levin (who goes by Rachel) still has his genitals, no amount of dress-up can change what he is by birth. If he’s had his genitals removed, a quick DNA test will show that he is still a male. Moreover, his former wife and their two children are additional examples of proof that Richard Levine is a man. This type of bizarre thinking from the Left has been going on for a long time to soften the brains of millions of Americans. Since most public schools do not teach students how to think, it’s no wonder they fall for fallacious arguments. Homosexuals have also been adept at using pop culture to their advantage, placing homosexual characters in non-stereotypical roles. Then there is the normalization of homosexuality for children. For example, And Tango Makes Three (Cristina Cardoze, “They’re in love. They’re gay. They’re penguins…. And they’re not alone” (June 6, 2006) is an illustrated children’s book about two male penguins that raise a baby penguin. It’s based on a true story of two male penguins in New York City’s Central Park Zoo that “adopt” a fertilized egg and raise the chick as their own. If Evolution is Right Can Anything be Wrong? Animals kill and rape every day. Why are killing and rape OK for animals but not for humans, who are only supposedly highly evolved animals? If evolution is true, at death we are nothing more than dust in the wind and in life we are nothing more than a bag of meat and bones. There’s the 1987 film Three Men and a Baby starring three very heterosexual men who want to help raise little Mary. Because two male animals raise a penguin chick does not mean they are homosexuals. Anyway, they are animals and we aren’t! Some concerned parents see the book as a homosexual propaganda piece and want it removed from the library’s regular shelves. A parent would have to consent before his or her child could check out the book. There’s no doubt the book is being pushed as a homosexual primer to soften up young minds for the more scholarly propaganda that will come later. In Biological Exuberance the author Bruce Bagemihl claims “The world is, indeed, teeming with homosexual, bisexual and transgendered creatures of every stripe and feather…. From the Southeastern Blueberry Bee of the United States to more than 130 different bird species worldwide, the ‘birds and the bees,’ literally, are queer.” Here’s the premise: Whatever animals do in nature is natural. What’s natural is normal. What’s normal is moral. So, if penguins engage in homosexual behavior, then that behavior must be natural, normal, and moral. How can we “human animals” impose our rules of sexual behavior on what’s natural in other parts of the animal kingdom? Homosexuals extrapolate that what animals do naturally in nature applies to what higher “animals” can do naturally without any moral judgments attached. But the lower animal/higher animal model breaks down when other so-called natural behaviors in animals are considered. For example, the Bible states, “It has happened to them according to the true proverb, ‘A DOG RETURNS TO ITS OWN VOMIT’ [Prov. 26:11] and, ‘A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire’” (2 Pet. 2:22). It’s unlikely that animals can be used as moral examples when they are compared with human behavior. Gregory Koukl makes these striking points: It’s not unusual, for example, to see male dogs mount each other in an erotic way. There are two problems with this view, however. [T]he observation is flawed because it assumes that erotic behavior in other mammals is the same as homosexual desire in human beings. Male homosexuals engage in sodomy because of an attraction to a gender. They are male erotic, and sodomy is an expression of that desire. Does the animal kingdom display this kind of same-gender eroticism? When a male dog mounts another male dog, is it because he’s attracted to the male gender of the other dog? I don’t think so. This same poor pooch will slavishly mount sofas or shrubs or anything else available, including the leg of your dinner guest. None of these things are the object of the canine’s sexual lust; they are merely the subject of it. The dog does not desire your unfortunate visitor. He simply desires to be stimulated. It doesn’t prove they have homosexual desire in any way parallel with humans. Consider the case of Timothy Treadwell depicted in the movie Grizzly Man . He lived among bears for 13 years and thought of them as his “family.” In 2003, Treadwell and his companion, Amie Huguenard, were mauled and mostly eaten by one of the Alaskan grizzlies he considered to be “All in the Family.” While he thought of the bears as his brothers and sisters, the bears thought of him as lunch. Then there’s the case of Armin Meiwes who killed and ate 43-year-old Bernd-Jurgen Brandes. ( “German cannibal tells of fantasy,” BBC News (December 3, 2003).) What did Mr. Meiwes do that was wrong given the premise that animal behavior is a normative model for human behavior? (Theodore Dalrymple, “The Case for Cannibalism” (January 5, 2005). For a detailed telling of the story, see Nathan Constantine, “A German Revival,” A History of Cannibalism: From Ancient Cultures to Survival Stories and Modern Psychopaths (Edison, New Jersey: Chartwell Books, 2006), 186–191.) If the bears that ate Treadwell were only doing what came naturally, then how can the cannibal nature of Meiwes be judged as abnormal given evolutionary assumptions? A few years ago, I saw an advertisement for a television special on Turner Network Television—“The Trials of Life.” The full-page advertisement showed a composite picture of six animals, one of which was the bald eagle, with the following caption: “Discover how similar the face of nature is to yours. The way you love, the way you fight, the way you grow, all have their roots in the kingdom we all live in: the animal kingdom.” The implication here is obvious: Humans are only an evolutionary step away from other animals. In biblical terms, men and women are not animals. God did not create Adam out of another pre-existing animal. While channel surfing, I came across the second installment of the six-part series of “The Trials of Life.” I soon learned what Benjamin Franklin meant when he described the eagle as a bird of “bad moral character.” With two eaglets in the nest and not enough food to go around, the mother allows the weakest eaglet to die. She then cannibalizes the dead eaglet and feeds it to the survivor. Was this natural or unnatural? Is this moral animal behavior that we should emulate? How do we know? Should we follow the example of the eagles or just the homosexual penguins? We mustn’t forget other “natural” animal behaviors. Animals rape regularly. Should we make the leap the homosexuals want to make regarding penguins? If homosexual behavior in penguins is a template for human sexuality, then why can’t a similar case be made for rape among humans? As hard as it might be to believe, the connection has been made. Randy Thornhill, a biologist, and Craig T. Palmer, an anthropologist, attempt to demonstrate in their book A Natural History of Rape (Randy Thornhill, and Craig T. Palmer, A Natural History of Rape: Biological Bases of Sexual Coercion (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000).) that evolutionary principles explain rape as a “genetically developed strategy sustained over generations of human life because it is a kind of sexual selection—a successful reproductive strategy.” They go on to claim, however, that even though rape can be explained genetically in evolutionary terms, this does not make the behavior morally right. But given Darwinian assumptions, there is no way to condemn rape on moral grounds. The same could be said for homosexual behavior and everything else. If we are truly the products of evolution, then there can be no moral judgments about anything. So then, if the homosexuals want to use penguins as their moral model, they need to consider all animal behavior when they build their moral worldview. If we should follow the animal world regarding homosexual penguins and thereby regard human homosexual behavior as normal, then we must be consistent and follow the animal world regarding rape, eating our young, and eating our neighbors and decriminalize these behaviors as well. Worldview 101: A Biblical View of the World. A biblical worldview is an essential part of thinking properly about God and His creation. Thanks in part to the Enlightenment and its long-lasting effects of modern thinking, we often think like humanists rather than like faithful stewards of God's truth. In order for Christians to be effective in the culture, they need to understand what it means to think God's thoughts after Him. Or as Cornelius Van Til succinctly stated it: ‘God is the original while man is the derivative. Man’s thoughts must therefore be patterned after God’s thoughts.’ Evolution: what's wrong with ‘teaching the controversy’ A new slogan in the fight against evolution education in the USA and elsewhere is ‘teach the controversy’. Although there are scientific controversies about the patterns and processes of evolution that are appropriate topics for the science classroom, and there is a continuing social controversy in certain circles about the validity of evolution, it is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible to teach that scientists seriously debate the validity of evolution. James Hutton: The Founder of Modern Geology. Part of the Earth Inside and Out Curriculum Collection. James Hutton (1726–1797), a Scottish farmer and naturalist, is known as the founder of modern geology. He was a great observer of the world around him. More importantly, he made carefully reasoned geological arguments. Hutton came to believe that the Earth was perpetually being formed; for example, molten material is forced up into mountains, eroded, and then eroded sediments are washed away. He recognized that the history of the Earth could be determined by understanding how processes such as erosion and sedimentation work in the present day. His ideas and approach to studying the Earth established geology as a proper science. In the late eighteenth century, when Hutton was carefully examining the rocks, it was generally believed that Earth had come into creation only around six thousand years earlier (on October 22, 4004 B.C., to be precise, according to the seventeenth century scholarly analysis of the Bible by Archbishop James Ussher of Ireland), and that fossils were the remains of animals that had perished during the Biblical flood. As for the structure of the Earth, “natural philosophers” agreed that much bedrock consisted of long, parallel layers which occurred at various angles, and that sediments deposited by water were compressed to form stone. Hutton perceived that this sedimentation takes place so slowly that even the oldest rocks are made up of, in his words, “materials furnished from the ruins of former continents.” The reverse process occurs when rock exposed to the atmosphere erodes and decays. He called this coupling of destruction and renewal the “great geological cycle,” and realized that it had been completed innumerable times. Hutton came to his chosen field by quite a roundabout route. Born in Edinburgh in 1726, he studied medicine and chemistry at the Universities of Edinburgh, Paris, and Leiden, in the Netherlands, and then spent fourteen years running two small family farms. It was farming that gave rise to Hutton’s obsession with how the land could hold its own against the destructive forces of wind and weather he saw at work around him. Hutton began to devote his scientific knowledge, his philosophical turn of mind, and his extraordinary powers of observation to a subject that had only recently acquired a name: geology. Around 1768 he moved to Edinburgh, where a visitor a few years later described his study as “so full of fossils and chemical apparatus that there is hardly room to sit down.” In a paper presented in 1788 before the Royal Society of Edinburgh, a newly-founded scientific organization, Hutton described a universe very different from the Biblical cosmos: one formed by a continuous cycle in which rocks and soil are washed into the sea, compacted into bedrock, forced up to the surface by volcanic processes, and eventually worn away into sediment once again. “The result, therefore, of this physical enquiry,” Hutton concluded, “is that we find no vestige of a beginning, no prospect of an end.” Relying on the same methods as do modern field geologists, Hutton cited as evidence a cliff at nearby Siccar Point, where the juxtaposition of vertical layers of gray shale and overlying horizontal layers of red sandstone could only be explained by the action of stupendous forces over vast periods of time. There Hutton realized that the sediments now represented by the gray shale had, after deposition, been uplifted, tilted, eroded away, and then covered by an ocean, from which the red sandstone was then deposited. The boundary between the two rock types at Siccar Point is now called the Hutton Unconformity. The fundamental force, theorized Hutton, was subterranean heat, as evidenced by the existence of hot springs and volcanoes. From his detailed observations of rock formations in Scotland and elsewhere in the British Isles, Hutton shrewdly inferred that high pressures and temperatures deep within the Earth would cause the chemical reactions that created formations of basalt, granite, and mineral veins. He also proposed that internal heat causes the crust to warm and expand, resulting in the upheavals that form mountains. The same process causes rock stratifications to tilt, fold and deform, as exemplified by the Siccar Point rocks. Another of Hutton’s key concepts was the Theory of Uniformitarianism. This was the belief that geological forces at work in the present day— barely noticeable to the human eye, yet immense in their impact—are the same as those that operated in the past. This means that the rates at which processes such as erosion or sedimentation occur today are similar to past rates, making it possible to estimate the times it took to deposit a sandstone, for example, of a given thickness. It became evident from such analysis that enormous lengths of time were required to account for the thicknesses of exposed rock layers. Uniformitarianism is one of the fundamental principles of earth science. Hutton’s theories amounted to a frontal attack on a popular contemporary school of thought called catastrophism: the belief that only natural catastrophes, such as the Great Flood, could account for the form and nature of a 6,000-year-old Earth. The great age of Earth was the first revolutionary concept to emerge from the new science of geology. The effect that this portrait of an ancient, dynamic planet had on the thinkers who followed in the next century was profound. Charles Darwin, for example, was well acquainted with Hutton’s ideas, which provided a framework for the eons required by the biological evolution he observed in the fossil record. English geologist Sir Charles Lyell, who was born the year Hutton died and whose influential book Principles of Geology won wide acceptance for the Theory of Uniformitarianism, wrote, “The imagination was first fatigued and overpowered by endeavouring to conceive the immensity of time required for the annihilation of whole continents by so insensible a process.” The “ideas of sublimity” awakened by this “plan of such infinite extent,” as Lyell referred to it, inspired not only Hutton’s contemporaries, but generations of geologists to come. Excerpted from EARTH: INSIDE AND OUT , edited by Edmond A. Mathez, a publication of the New Press. © 2000 American Museum of Natural History. A Timeline of Video Game Controversies. First Arcade Video Game is Released Nutting, an early arcade game manufacturer, produces 1,500 Computer Space machines. The components are packaged with a 13-inch black-and-white TV set in a futuristic-looking cabinet. The first arcade video game is released, but the public finds it too difficult to play. The following year, Pong, a simple tennis video game, is released in a local bar to great success. First Home Video Game, Magnavox’s “Odyssey,” is Released 100,000 units are sold. Many people buy it because it is the closest thing to a home version of Pong. First Controversial Video Game, "Death Race," Pulled Off Store Shelves The objective of the lo-fi black and white game that looks like a slightly more advanced version of Pong is to earn points by running over as many "gremlins" as possible within a given time frame. According to video game historian Steve L. Kent, “What got everyone upset about Death Race was that you heard this little 'ahhhk' when the person got hit, and a little gravestone came up.” Due to public outcry, Death Race’s manufacturer takes the game off the market. "Custer’s Revenge" Protested In the game persona of General Custer, the player runs from "enemy" arrows toward a Native American woman strapped to a pole. Once there, Custer would get it on with (or, according to many critics, "rape") the woman for points. Two hundred fifty protestors gather at the spot where the public is viewing the game for the first time; it never finds much success. "Night Trap" Banned ; "Mortal Kombat" Scrutinized by Congress The Sega CD version of Night Trap is removed from store shelves at Toys "R" Us and F.A.O. Schwarz locations in the United States in direct response to a December 9, 1993, joint Senate Judiciary and Government Affairs Committee hearing on video game violence. Night Trap is cited as "shameful", "ultra-violent", "sick", and "disgusting", encouraging an "effort to trap and kill women". In particular, a scene in which the character Lisa is wearing a nightgown while captured by Augers attempting to drain her blood is found to be very offensive, given the circumstances in which she is attacked (scantily clad in a private bathroom). The game's goal is not to trap or kill women but to save them from harm. Mortal Kombat is the first video game to feature lifelike, realistic violence. Together with Night Trap and Doom it is the focus of the 1993 Congressional Hearings. The formation of the Entertainment Software Ratings Board as a self-regulated entity deflects potential government regulation, and Mortal Kombat stays in stores. Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) Created The ESRB, a self-regulatory organization that assigns age and content ratings to video games is established by the Entertainment Software Association (formerly Interactive Digital Software Association). The rating system is strictly voluntary; however, nearly all video games are submitted for rating because many retail stores prohibit the sale of unrated video games and the major console manufacturers will not license games for their systems unless they carry ESRB ratings. The formation of the ESRB deflects potential government regulation of video games. "Phantasmagoria" Banned in Some Stores Like Night Trap, this game features a helpless female as the central character, except Phantasmagoria is extremely bloody, and sex and violence are closely linked–in fact, directly, as one video sequence is of a rape scene. The game is banned in some retail outlets in the U.S. Jack Thompson Files First Video Game Lawsuit Anti-video games activist and attorney Jack Thompson files the first of what are to be a large number of lawsuits claiming video games are responsible for violence perpetrated by teens. The lawsuit is filed on behalf of the parents of three children killed in the Heath High School shooting in 1997. Investigations show that the perpetrator had regularly played various computer games (including Doom, Quake, Castle Wolfenstein, Redneck Rampage, Nightmare Creatures, MechWarrior, and Resident Evil), accessed some pornographic websites and owned a videotape of "The Basketball Diaries," which includes a high school student dreaming about shooting his teacher and some classmates. The suit alleges that the producers of the games, the movie, and the operators of the Internet sites were negligent in distributing this material to a minor because it would desensitize him and make him more prone to violence. The suit is filed in federal district court and is dismissed for failing to present a legally recognizable claim. In July 2008, Thompson is permanently disbarred by the Florida Supreme Court for inappropriate conduct, including making false statements to tribunals and disparaging and humiliating litigants. Release of "Grand Theft Auto" Causes Controversy The game earns notoriety for its theme and approach almost immediately after it is released. The player’s mission is to drive prostitutes around town, evade the feds, and run drugs and porn, and in the process, kill lots of people. In 2001, shortly after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the release of GTAIII is postponed in order to alter content involving New York City. Video Game Panic Reaches New Heights Following Columbine Massacre Once it is revealed that the two students who opened fire at Columbine were fans of violent games, Doom in particular, people begin to blame the games for the tragedy. Several families of Columbine victims file a federal lawsuit against 25 entertainment companies for allegedly causing the deaths. The suit is dismissed in 2002; another case making similar allegations about a 1997 school shooting is dismissed by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals the same year. Indianapolis Enacts Ordinance Limiting Minors’ Access to Violent Games The city ordinance would have forbidden any operator of five or more video-game machines in one place from allowing a minor unaccompanied by a parent, guardian, or other custodian to use "an amusement machine that is harmful to minors”; it requires appropriate warning signs, and that such machines be separated by a partition from the other machines in the location and that their viewing areas be concealed from persons who are on the other side of the partition. The ordinance never goes into effect, and is struck down by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals the following year in American Amusement Machine Ass'n v. Kendrick . Surgeon General Finds Little Correlation Between Media & Violence Surgeon General of the United States David Satcher, M.D., Ph.D., leads a study on violence in youth and determines that while the impact of video games on violent behavior has yet to be determined, "findings suggest that media violence has a relatively small impact on violence." According to the report the strongest risk factors for school shootings center on mental stability and the quality of home life, not media exposure. Federal Legislation Proposed to Ban Sale of Violent Games to Minors US Representative Joe Baca (D-Calif.) introduces a bill that would make selling or renting video games to minors a federal crime. The bill is aptly named the Protect Children from Video Game Sex and Violence Act of 2003 . Washington State introduces a similar law, which would fine retailers about $500 for selling violent games to minors. More GTA Controversy Two Tennessee families sue the maker of Grand Theft Auto and other video game companies after a shooting in which the killer claimed he was imitating GTAIII. The suit is dismissed. Later the same year, NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg pressures the game company to remove the line “Kill the Haitians” from GTA: Vice City following a wave of protests by Haitian-American interest groups over the discriminatory content. The groups also files suit in federal court, then removes the case to state court in Florida which is expected to be less First Amendment-friendly. Law Professor Speaks Out Against Video Games Professor Kevin Saunders argues that video games cause violence and violence should be included with obscenity in a category of unprotected speech. Psychologist Criticizes Claims About Link Between Video Games and Violence Guy Cumberbatch, PhD, director of the U.K. Communications Research Group, writes in a report: “The evident weakness in the individual studies and the general pattern of inconsistent findings would not normally lead us to expect researchers to make any strong claims about video games. However, this is far from the case. As with other research on media violence, some of the strongest claims are made on the most flimsy of evidence…The real puzzle is that anyone looking at the research evidence in this field could draw any conclusions about the pattern, let alone argue with such confidence and even passion that it demonstrates the harm of violence on television, in film and in video games.” Federal Court Finds Illinois Video Game Statute Unconstitutional In Entertainment Software Ass'n v. Blagojevich , the Northern District of Ill. grants a permanent injunction against enforcement of a law that bans the distribution to a minor of any video game with certain violent content, requires such games be labeled as restricted to adults only, and requires retailers to post signs explaining the industry ratings system. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals later affirms this decision. Senator Pushes for Video Game Regulations US Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) advocates for new regulations on video game sales after controversy over the sexually explicit “Hot Coffee” modification made available online for Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. Professor Debunks Theory of Link Between Games & Violence Henry Jenkins, PhD, Professor of Communication, Journalism, and Cinematic Arts at University of Southern California, writes: "According to federal crime statistics, the rate of juvenile violent crime in the United States is at a 30-year low. Researchers find that people serving time for violent crimes typically consume less media before committing their crimes than the average person in the general population. It's true that young offenders who have committed school shootings in America have also been game players. But young people in general are more likely to be gamers – 90 percent of boys and 40 percent of girls play. The overwhelming majority of kids who play do NOT commit antisocial acts. ("Reality Bytes: Eight Myths about Video Games Debunked") Michigan and Louisiana Video Game Laws Found Unconstitutional In Entertainment Software Ass'n v. Granholm and Entertainment Software Ass'n v. Foti , district courts in Mich. and La., respectively, grant injunctions against state laws barring dissemination to minors of video games with certain violent content. Thompson Files More Lawsuits Against Video Game Creators Now-disbarred attorney Jack Thompson files a lawsuit against several video game companies claiming Grand Theft Auto: Vice City caused a teenager in New Mexico to “act out, copycat, replicate and emulate the violence” when he murdered his father, stepmother and stepsister. Thompson also files suit in Florida to have the video game bully removed from store shelves, calling the game a “nuisance” and “Columbine simulator.” The Florida judge determines there is no content in the game that was not already on late-night television. Oklahoma Video Game Law Struck Down In Entertainment Merchants Ass'n v. Henry , the Western District Court of Oklahoma finds the state’s law barring the dissemination to minors of video games with “inappropriate” violent content unconstitutional, and grants a permanent injunction against its enforcement. Professor Alleges Link Between Video Games and Violence Psychology professor Craig Anderson and his colleagues, Douglas A. Gentile and Katherine E. Buckley, publish Violent Video Game Effects on Children and Adolescents: Theory, Research, and Public Policy , in which they claim that exposure to violent video games and other forms of media violence constitutes a significant risk factor for later aggressive and violent behavior. They argue that society should begin a more productive debate about whether to reduce the high rates of exposure to media violence, and delineate the public policy options that are likely be most effective. In their introduction the authors also claim: "…. the scientific debate about whether exposure to media violence causes increases in aggressive behavior is over and should have been over 30 years ago." Dr. Anderson's research has been widely criticized for overstating his results and failing to adequately acknowledge alternate views or limitations of the data on media violence. Minnesota Video Game Ban Enjoined In Entertainment Software Ass'n v. Swanson , the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals strikes down a Minn. law that bars anyone under 17 from buying or renting a video game rated “Mature” or “Adults Only.” The same court enjoins a St. Louis County ordinance in 2003 that bars the sale or rental of video games with violent content. Mental Health Experts Disclaim Link Between Games & Violence Lawrence Kutner, PhD, and Cheryl K. Olson, ScD, co-founders of the Harvard Medical School Center for Mental Health and Media, write in their book Grand Theft Childhood: The Surprising Truth about Violent Video Games : "It’s clear that the ‘big fears’ bandied about in the press – that violent video games make children significantly more violent in the real world; that children engage in the illegal, immoral, sexist and violent acts they see in some of these games – are not supported by the current research, at least in such a simplistic form. That should make sense to anyone who thinks about it. After all, millions of children and adults play these games, yet the world has not been reduced to chaos and anarchy." Ninth Circuit Rules Against California Video Game Statute In Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants Ass'n, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rules: "In sum, the evidence presented by the State does not support the Legislature’s purported interest in preventing psychological or neurological harm. Nearly all of the research is based on correlation, not evidence of causation, and most of the studies suffer from significant, admitted flaws in methodology as they relate to the State’s claimed interest. None of the research establishes or suggests a causal link between minors playing violent video games and actual psychological or neurological harm, and inferences to that effect would not be reasonable. In fact, some of the studies caution against inferring causation." Group Alleges Violent Media Present Health Risk The American Academy of Pediatrics's Council on Communications and Media writes in policy statement titled "Media Violence": "Exposure to violence in media, including television, movies, music, and video games, represents a significant risk to the health of children and adolescents. Extensive research evidence indicates that media violence can contribute to aggressive behavior, desensitization to violence, nightmares, and fear of being harmed…" Supreme Court Agrees to Decide Constitutionality of Video Game Statute The Supreme Court of the United States granted the state of California’s petition to review the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision finding the state’s video game law unconstitutional. The California law limited distribution of video games with certain violent content and barred the sale or rental of video games with violent content. The Supreme Court heard oral argument on Nov. 2. Supreme Court Declares California Law Unconstitutional In June of 2011, the Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 opinion in Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association that the California law restricting the sale and distribution of violent video games to minors was unconstitutional. The majority opinion established video games as protected under the First Amendment, saying that "speech about violence is not obscene" and that they are "as much entitled to the protection of free speech as the best of literature. Mass shootings stir debate over media violence The tragic shooting at Sandy Hook elementary in Newtown, CT, in December of 2012, reopened the debate over the effects of media violence and especially the playing of violent video games. Community groups organized drives to remove video games and a number of libraries curtailed the playing of video games in their branches. The Massachusetts Department of Transportation pulled arcade games with plastic guns from rest areas along the Massachusetts turn-pike, replacing them with more "appropriate" games. Debate had already been stirred earlier in the year after a mass shooting in July in Aurora, CO. NCAC’s MISSION. To promote freedom of thought, inquiry and expression and oppose censorship in all its forms. NCAC is a coalition of over 50 national nonprofits. Stay Informed. Free speech news, events and advocacy opportunities. Join our mailing list » Report Censorship. Have your rights to freedom of speech and expression been threatened? Tell us » Support NCAC. Censorship silences meaningful social change. Help us defend freedom of expression for everyone, every day. Dr Jonathan Sarfati. Dr Jonathan Sarfati was born in Ararat, Australia in 1964. He moved to New Zealand as a child and later studied science at Victoria University of Wellington. He obtained a B.Sc. (Hons.) in Chemistry with two physics papers substituted (nuclear and condensed matter physics). His Ph.D. in Chemistry was awarded for a thesis entitled ‘A Spectroscopic Study of some Chalcogenide Ring and Cage Molecules’. He has co-authored papers in mainstream scientific journals on high temperature superconductors and selenium-containing ring and cage-shaped molecules. He also had a co-authored paper on high-temperature superconductors published in Nature when he was 22. Dr Sarfati has been a Christian since 1984. He has long been interested in apologetics, the defense of the faith, and was a co-founder of the Wellington Christian Apologetics Society (New Zealand). Creation vs evolution is of course a vital area, because of the ramifications for the doctrines of Creation, the Fall which brought death into the world, and their links to the doctrines of the Incarnation, Atonement and Bodily Resurrection of the God-man Jesus Christ. Dr Sarfati is married to Sherry and they enjoy spending time with their two grand-daughters. In August 1996, he returned to the country of his birth to take up a position as a research scientist and editorial consultant for Creation Ministries International in Brisbane. In this capacity, he is co-editor of Creation magazine, and also writes and reviews articles for Journal of Creation , CMI’s in-depth peer-reviewed publication, as well as contributing to CMI’s creation.com website. In 1999, his first book was published— Refuting Evolution , which countered a teachers guidebook by the National Academy of Sciences, Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science , which had been widely circulated and publicized. Refuting Evolution now has 450,000 copies in print. Later that year he was a co-author of the updated and expanded Answers Book [note: now entitled The Creation Answers Book ], answering 20 of the most-asked questions about creation/evolution. He later wrote Refuting Evolution 2 , countering the PBS Evolution series and an anticreationist article in Scientific American . In 2004, he wrote Refuting Compromise , defending a straightforward biblical creation timeline and a global flood, and answering biblical and scientific objections, concentrating on the errant teachings of day-age/local flood advocate Hugh Ross. It has been acclaimed as ‘the most powerful biblical and scientific defense of a straightforward view of Genesis creation ever written!’ See the introductory chapter and some reviews. In 2006, he co-authored 15 Reasons to Take Genesis as History with Don Batten, as a concise reference guide for Christians, including pastors and theologians, why Genesis can be trusted as real history of Creation about 6000 years ago and a global Flood. In 2008, he finished By Design: Evidence for nature’s Intelligent Designer—the God of the Bible . This demonstrates many examples of design in many areas, shows why chemical evolution can’t explain the origin of first life, and answers many objections to the Intelligent Design movement by invoking the biblical Creation-Fall model. In 2010, Dr Sarfati wrote The Greatest Hoax on Earth? Refuting Dawkins on evolution , a response to leading atheopath Richard Dawkins’ latest book The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution (see website). That year, Dr Sarfati emigrated to the USA with his wife to work in the CMI–USA office as author, speaker, apologist, and Head Scientist. In 2012, he considerably expanded and updated a classic general apologetics book, Christianity for Skeptics , by Dr Steve Kumar of New Zealand. This presents a positive case for the existence of God, the inspiration of the Bible, and the divinity and resurrection of Christ, and answers challenges from suffering, atheism, Eastern philosophy, and Islam. The update now also contains cutting edge material on design in nature, the Christian roots of science, and answering the ‘new atheists’. In 2015, Dr Sarfati wrote probably his most important and comprehensive book yet: The Genesis Account: A theological, historical, and scientific commentary on Genesis 1–11 , almost 800 pages long. Dr Sarfati is also a keen chess player. He is a former New Zealand Chess Champion, and represented New Zealand in three Chess Olympiads, and drew with Boris Spassky, world champion 1969–1972, in a tournament game (those interested in the game score can see this chess site). In 1988, F.I.D.E., the International Chess Federation, awarded him the title of F.I.D.E. Master (FM). Dr Sarfati regularly accepts challenges from multiple players where he plays ‘blindfold’, i.e. from memory without sight or any physical contact with the board, so moves are communicated via a recognized chess notation (See an example at the Croydon Chess Club). Twelve is the most played simultaneously to date—see photo, above right. Education. B.Sc. (Hons.) in Chemistry (with condensed matter and nuclear physics papers substituted) Ph.D. in Spectroscopy (Physical Chemistry) Honors/Awards/Associations. 1988: New Zealand Chess Champion 1988: F.I.D.E. Master title, The International Chess Federation. Publications. Books. Refuting Evolution ; See index of online chapters, and free chapter study guides Refuting Evolution 2 ; See index of online chapters. Refuting Compromise: A biblical and scientific refutation of ‘progressive creationism’ (billions of years) as popularized by astronomer Hugh Ross ; See introductory chapter and reviews. By Design: Evidence for nature’s Intelligent Designer—the God of the Bible ; See extract: The Prostate Gland— is it ‘badly designed’? Countering design critics, and guest reviews of the book by ‘Nate’ and by an engineering student. The Greatest Hoax on Earth? Refuting Dawkins on evolution . See website, and extract Christianity for Skeptics The Genesis Account: A theological, historical, and scientific commentary on Genesis 1–11 . See reviews. Now available in E-book and Mobi versions. Busting Myths - 30 Ph.D. scientists who believe the Bible and its account of origins (with Gary Bates) The Creation Answers Book (edited by Don Batten) with David Catchpoole and Dr Carl Wieland) (available in Albanian, Dutch, German, Hungarian, Russian and Spanish). See index of online chapters and free chapter study guides. Answers to the 4 Big Questions (edited by Dr Don Batten; with Ken Ham & Dr Carl Wieland) 15 Reasons to Take Genesis as History (with Dr Don Batten) Mammoth: Riddle of the Ice Age (Booklet) Why would a loving God allow death and suffering? (Booklet) The Genesis Files: Meet 22 Modern-Day Scientists Who Believe in a Six-Day Recent Creation (One of the interviews is with Dr Sarfati) In Six Days: Why 50 [Ph.D.] Scientists Choose to Believe in Creation (Dr Sarfati contributed one of the chapters) Chemicals to Living Cell: Fantasy or Science? Jesus in Genesis: The Messianic Prophecies Arguments Creationists Should NOT Use Leaving Your Brains at the Church Door? The power of logic in defending your faith. Evolution and the Holocaust God the Master Designer Six Days … Really? Refuting compromise from the Scriptures Are Miracles Scientific? The Christian Roots of Science Bioethics [Animal welfare vs animal rights, Eugenics and euthanasia, Abortion, Cloning and stem cells, etc.] Refuting the New Atheists Retaking The Ground DVD Mini-Series with Dr Tas Walker The Greatest Hoax on Earth (Video download) The Incarnation (Video download) Creation science articles. Time ’s alleged ‘ape-man’ trips up (again)! Response to ‘One Giant Step for Mankind’, Time magazine cover story, 23 July 2001 ( Ardipithecus ramidus kadabba ) Was Adam from Australia? The mystery of ‘Mungo Man’ Ethiopian ‘earliest humans’ find: A severe blow to the beliefs of Hugh Ross and similar ‘progressive creationist’ compromise views Neandertals were fully human in thinking: Symbolic items show human cognition and symbolic thinking The Darwin–Hitler connection; refuting ‘Hitler was a Christian’ mendacity Mangling misotheists’ ignorant attacks on the Bible (refuting alleged contradictions) Evolution v natural selection (includes mutations, information, ‘bad design’, missing links) Darwin isn’t the final word (includes Haldane’s Dilemma and the bacterial flagellum) What about creationist disagreements? Are transitional series plausible? God created with functional maturity, not ‘appearance of age’ Introduction to Refuting Compromise: A biblical and scientific refutation of ‘progressive creationism’ (billions of years) as popularized by astronomer Hugh Ross (plus links to outside reviews) Exposé of NavPress’s new Hugh Ross ‘progressive creationist’ Book, The Genesis Question (Semi-Technical) (Semi-Technical) Analysis of the Hovind–Ross Debate, John Ankerberg Show, October 2000 (Semi-Technical) Analysis of the Lisle–Ross Debate, ‘Dr Bob Grant’ radio program, December 2004 (Semi-Technical) Ten major differences and similarities between Calendar-Day and Day-Age Creationists—According to Dr Hugh Ross Critique of the introductory chapter of Hugh Ross’s new book A Matter of Days: Resolving a Creation Controversy Trilobites on the Ark? Hugh Ross’s latest bungles on the created kinds The Fall: a cosmic catastrophe—Hugh Ross’s blunders on plant death in the Bible Questions arising from an old earth talk: Responding to old-earther Eric Gustafson William Lane Craig’s intellectually dishonest attack on biblical creationists William Lane Craig contra The Genesis Account ‘Just preach the Gospel!’ Or: how not to impress atheists Hold on, Mr Holzmann: Leading homeschool supplier misleads about biblical creationist exegesis Evangelical compromise misses the essentials (Semi-technical, review of The Essence of Darwinism by Kirsten Birkett) ID theorist blunders on Bible: Reply to Dr William Dembski Church of England apologises to Darwin: Anglican Church’s neo- Chamberlainite appeasement of secularism Response to the evolution appeasers ( Treasury , New Zealand) Evolution makes atheists out of people —Mark 2! Compromising chaplain castigates creation, round 2 A high view of Scripture? Second response re: objections from ‘Atheist spat’ article. Interviews of Dr Sarfati. An awesome mind: A talk with one of Christianity’s foremost defenders, Jonathan Sarfati, from Creation magazine. Now a Creationist (Dr Sarfati’s guest article on the Boundless.org website explaining why he became a biblical creationist; see original article on this site) Radio interview on Bob Enyart Live, 27 April 2010 Dr Sarfati explains the scientific and biblical evidence for creation and against evolution, Curs-Ed Net Breakthrough Radio (CNBR), 25 April 2011 Dr Sarfati discusses the amazing designs in nature, from his book By Design , Curs-Ed Net Breakthrough Radio (CNBR), 20 June 2011 Interview on Crossroads TV, Canada, 4 November 2010. “Jim Cantelon speaks with Dr Jonathan Sarfati about his book The Greatest Hoax On Earth? which meets Dawkins The Greatest Show on Earth head-on. He answers Dawkins’ challenge. He shows that to believe the Bible’s account of Creation/Fall/Redemption does not commit intellectual suicide, but it is the intellectually superior position.” Part 1 Part 2. Interviews by Dr Sarfati from Creation magazine.