Here’s creationist Derek Isaacs, someone I’ve not heard of, promulgating his inanities on an episode of “Creation Today.” Isaacs says that, after studying the writings of “purveyors of evolutionary biology” like Darwin, Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and E.O. Wilson (since when was Hitchens a “purveyor of evolutionary biology?), he discovered himself “in a very dark place”—a place where rape was basically okay because, after all, evolution tells men they have to propagate their genes.
As The Raw Story reports:
“You have to start asking questions: Well, if evolution is true, and it’s just all about the male propagating their DNA, we had to ask hard questions, like, well, is rape wrong?” Isaacs said, as one of his hosts gasps.
He said marriage would be “anathema” in an evolutionary worldview because it would limit sexual relations to one man and one woman for life.
“According to the evolutionary worldview, [if] that male is strong enough and he had wonderful genes, he should propagate his DNA as much as possible so that the species can progress,” Isaacs said. “So it redefines everything about our society.”
I won’t bother to rebut the view that whatever behaviors instilled in our genes (and it’s dubious that rape is one of them) must be okay in modern society. After all, how much credibility can somebody have who describes evolution as merely ” random chaotic force”?
But Isaacs’ dilemma instantiates a broader issue: the widespread view that if evolution were true, there would be no reason to behave morally. After all, if we’re simply evolved beasts, there’s nothing wrong with behaving like beasts. This, perhaps, is the psychological reason behind most of America’s opposition to evolution. Michael Ruse once said something like this: people don’t stay up at night worrying whether birds evolved from dinosaurs; they stay up worrying about morality.
The response to Isaacs’ idiocy is, of course, is that humans certainly evolved, but we also evolved in a way that made possible a form of non-genetic evolution: the propagation of culture. And our culture has “evolved” to the point where we recognize that what evolved genetically—behaviors that helped spread the genes of our ancestors—is not necessarily desirable in modern societies. Our ancestors were probably deeply xenophobic, too, but that’s simply not good behavior in today’s interconnected world. As Paul Bloom has noted, babies do start out rather xenophobic, being nice only to those whom they recognize, and that cooperation and beneficence must be instilled later through learning.
At any rate, Isaacs is full of it, but you should realize that his attitudes are surprisingly common.
You can see the long version of this program here.