Sociology Blog Post

I very much believe that it is in the state's best interest to be more involved in parenting even to the point of controlling what is taught in the home. From a Christian perspective, this is especially important because the Christian worldview sees each, individual person as valuable and able to contribute in some way to socitey. Children learn, grow, and develop in their homes and familial life can either have a negative or positive impact on each child. God places much value on not only individuals but of the institution of the "traditional" family as well. Therefore, we are called to protect and guide this institution in order to keep it grounded in the word of God. If parents, whether experienced or not, are allowed to do or teach anything to their children that goes against the word of God without some intervention, we as Christians are not accurately carrying out our calling. Unfortunately, children are often times taught immoral and ungodly practives at school, and if these practices are also taught or encouraged in the home, then children will not know any differently and will continue to head down the path of sin.

From another stand point, state governments should truely want to become more involved in parenting. These children who are being raised in a family will someday become the next generation of adults, and leaders of the community. For society to continue running smoothly, it is vital to have in place solid, well educated leaders with ethically right values and morals. Therefore, state governments must take the initiative to step into familial situations where children are not learning or being raised as they ought to, and take action. Just as it is our responsibility as Christians to protect and direct the institution of family, so is it the government's responsibility to not only represent the people, but to guide them as well!

Three Problems With Naturalism

There are many problems with the naturalistic view of life. For instance, naturalism boasts the process of natural selection, in which traits that aid in sufficiency and survival are selected and carry on generation to generation. Naturalists believe that this can account for not only the diversity of life but the continuation of cells, proteins, plants, and animals. According to this view, mutations keep everything moving and progressing. However, problems arise when looking at the makeup of a simple protein. In order for a protein to work properly, the DNA must be assembled just so and the amino acids fit together perfectly like a puzzle. How could naturalism, which cannot account for the origin of the machine we call DNA have spontaneously generated such a system that occurs billions of times a second in every human body? Herein lies the problem: naturalism cannot account for the origin and true complexity of a simple protein without a creator.
Secondly, the bacterial flagellum clearly discounts the naturalistic view of life, favoring intelligent design instead. The flagellum is a power house with a motor made up of intricate parts that must be placed just so and in a specific order in order for the flagellum to complete its tasks inside the body. How could such an intricate and powerful little bacteria be present if an intelligent creator had not created it? Naturalism proves impossible here too, as it cannot account for complex organisms such as the flagellum.
Lastly, a large problem comes with the idea of spontaneous generation. Naturalism uses this to explain the origin of everything: from the earth to the cell of a living being. Supposedly, the first cell came to be in a pile of primordial goop. However, what naturalism fails to point out, is the extreme probability of this actually occurring. To date the current probability is 10 to the 100 billionth power. It is in fact more probable that you and your entire extended family would win the lottery every week for your entire lives than for a single cell to emerge from essentially nothing.
Although scientists cling to the naturalistic worldview, favoring natural selection and spontaneous generation, one thing remains true: we have all the evidence we need that God is our intelligent designer, just look at the complexity of life!