For a society that cares so much about treating everyone fairly and not judging people, they sure do love to slap labels on everyone and assume motives that don’t exist. If you think we should enforce immigration law or that white privilege doesn’t exist, they label you a racist. If you don’t believe in the pay gap or you think people shouldn’t be allowed to murder babies in the womb, you’re labeled a sexist. If you don’t think men should be allowed to use the women’s bathroom because rapists could take advantage of that situation, you’re labeled a “transphobe.” I don’t think any of these labels are anything to worry about, because they’re based on absolutely no facts about you whatsoever.
The funniest label society likes to give today, however, is that people are “anti-science.” The label used to be common for atheists to use against Christians, and many Christians can be anti-science at times, but now it’s become more of a political tool. If you don’t think climate change is man-made or you think a fetus in the womb is a human, you’re “anti-science.” This is, of course, mainly used by Democrats and liberals to target Republicans and conservatives. So here’s a look at why conservative viewpoints are often more pro-science than liberal viewpoints.
1. Science Reveals that Babies in the Womb are Still Human
This should go without saying. Planned Parenthood likes to lie to their patients, not let them hear their babies heartbeat and tell them that the body parts clearly visible on the ultrasound are just “globs of cells.” The baby’s heartbeat begins at 6 weeks, according to Baby Center, which is before the time the government decides they’re human. The brain begins developing after 3 weeks. That “glob of cells” is not going to come out as a chicken, or a bit of broccoli. There is a 0% that this will come out as anything other than a human baby, because it is a human baby. Ultrasound science has given us a clearer picture than ever of the baby’s development of its HUMAN body. Anyone who claims that a fetus in the womb is anything other than a human growing is just anti-science.
2. All of the Predictions from “An Inconvenient Truth” Were Wrong
Remember when everyone who claimed global warming was a myth was a science denier? Turns out we were smarter than they thought. The South Pole melting was supposed to cause sea levels to rise to a catastrophic level. Instead, the South Pole has been growing as steadily as it always has, and sea levels are rising as steadily as they always have. Mr. Gore clearly didn’t have much faith in this prediction, because he bought a beachfront mansion. Katrina wasn’t man-made, and it didn’t lead to more catastrophic hurricanes. In fact, we’ve had the longest drought of Level 3+ hurricanes on US soil since these things have been recorded in the time since. There are more polar bears now than when Al Gore was born, so they aren’t dying off. Science seems to have disproved these so-called “scientific claims.” Denying this would have to mean you’re “anti-science.”
3. Mainstream Media Continues to Preach Narratives that Evidence Doesn’t Back
“Hands up, don’t shoot” was proven false. Mainstream media continues to bring it up. Michael Brown was either a robber or a drug dealer depending on who you believe that fought the police offer who was arresting him. After months, there is still zero evidence of Trump being in bed with the Russians, and anyone who showed even the slightest evidence of such collusion has been removed from the administration. While the Russians did indeed hack the DNC, there’s no evidence of them hacking the election itself, and many liberals fail to acknowledge the fact that it wouldn’t have affected the election one bit if there were no sketchy dealings going on to begin with. I can admit there’s some of this on the right too, what with the wiretapping scandal, but at least there was a SHRED of evidence pointing to the possibility. It wasn’t just made up out of thin air to tell a narrative. There was something there that was misconstrued. But making claims with no evidence is the very definition of “anti-science.”
4. Men Can’t Magically Become Women
Men and women should absolutely be treated equally by society. I think I can believe that and at the same time believe that men and women are naturally different. There’s a reason men can win women’s weightlifting contests and women tend to be better singers than men. We are all born with these biological tendencies one way or another. These biological tendencies are what forms the gender identities associated with the sexes. This is the reason that people who want to change their gender have to change the chemical balance of hormones in their body, which is incredibly unnatural. Let me ask you something: if it’s so natural, why is every method of treating it artificial? Now, I understand some people have serious gender identity disorder and I pray that they get treated for that, but we conservatives acknowledge this for what it is: an illness. That’s why the transgender suicide rate is upwards of 40%. Bullying or mistreatment by society doesn’t do that. Only 20% of bullied students in school even think about committing suicide, far fewer actually attempt it. Suicide rates of Jews in Nazi Germany were between 50 and 100 per 100,000. A 40% suicide rate only occurs through severe mental illness. We who understand science know that. To embrace mental illness as the norm is just anti-science.
5. Christianity Can Be Scientifically Validated
While many scientists still debate on how scientifically accurate creationism might be, the realization that there is evidence for such an event is growing. Many in the scientific community are following the Intelligent Design Theory, which states that some intelligent being created and designed the universe to fit exactly the way it does. More scientists sign onto this theory as it becomes clear that the conditions necessary to create any sort of life did not exist on earth during the time science says life began on earth. Scientific and archaeological evidence exists for many of the events of the Old Testament, Jesus’ resurrection, and loads of other biblical events. With so much evidence existing, you’d think society would accept that there might be some merit to Christianity. Instead, the ignore the evidence that’s there and say it isn’t scientifically valid. Well, as we’ve established, ignoring evidence is anti-science.
So we don’t really have an issue of science vs. faith or racism vs. equality or tradition vs. progress in the battle between conservatives and liberals. The main difference is this: liberals craft the story first and hope the facts add up. Conservatives wait for the facts to come out to form the story based on those. There are exceptions, of course (looking at you, Donald Trump), but in general the mainstream media and liberals use science, emotional appeals or anecdotes as tools in an attempt to push agenda. Science is the answer when they want to say Christianity is for idiots. But Christian values are important when Trump wants to keep refugees out. But Democrats did the same thing and they didn’t protest. The same women who march for their rights in America think you’re Islamophobic if you point out the incredibly sexist laws in islamic countries. Islamic “feminists” running the march were advocates of sharia law. They only care about their narrative of “I’m really good and care about tolerance and helping people, and anyone who disagrees with me is a bad person who I care nothing about, I won’t tolerate and I won’t help.” Meanwhile, conservatives will continue to call out the hypocrisy and ask for change, but they will just ignore the evidence of hypocrisy, because they’re anti-science. So if they think I’m anti-science, I’d say it’s just the pot calling the kettle black. Just something to think about.