To the editor:

I was amazed at Lawrence lately, since I thought that materialistic evolution was the standard. However, a child molester wanted to move here and a basketball player was in an altercation and outcries erupted. When is acting like an animal wrong for an animal? Lawrence needs to be more tolerant and forgiving, just like Christians are told to be. People just don’t practice what they preach.

When certain issues arise, the basics of materialistic evolution are forgotten. People don’t live like there are no moral absolutes, but instead fly to judgment and try to keep others out. People should read Peter Singer, James Rachels and Daniel Dennett for a more (not fully) consistent position. A consistent Darwinian has no moral absolutes and murder is simply a survival of the fittest. No real harm is done; all will die shortly anyway.

Animals don’t have absolutes but humans force absolutes on pit bulls, though that is species-ism since dogs are just products of evolution too. Peter Singer says that killing some chimps is more immoral than killing some humans, but he doesn’t include himself.

Lawrence has strayed from an evolutionary world view and is stealing from Christianity for its morality. I guess stealing is an absolute that is tossed when convenient too. Maybe it is true that all know there is a God down deep but they suppress it until his morality is needed for comfort. God’s commands do not evolve for our comfort, and he will not be mocked like that.

Richard Smith,

Lawrence