Has evolution become a four-letter word in the United States?
Photo: kevindooley
Uh oh, here we go. Seems a new film on Charles Darwin can’t find distribution in the US, despite opening the Toronto Film Festival and being sold to most other countries in the world.
And guess why they can’t seem to find a distributor in the States?
Because Darwin’s “theories on human evolution are too controversial for religious American audiences,” at least according to the film’s producer.
Ok, I know that there are a good amount of people in the US that don’t necessarily concur with what Darwin had to say. But Hollywood isn’t necessarily known for its conservative ways. Didn’t Bill Maher just do a scathing movie about religion not too long ago?
And I’m not quite sure I agree with this comment:
…US distributors have turned down the film that could cause uproar in a country that, on the whole, dismisses scientific theories of the way we evolved.
Really, “on the whole”? But, this is the Daily Mail, and they certainly enjoy making inflammatory remarks.
Then again, with basic health coverage for all US citizens continuing to be labeled as “Socialism,” and that word being worse that the Devil here on Earth, maybe they’re right.
Do you think that on the whole, the US does not believe in evolution, or is this just a media ploy? Share your thoughts below.
About the Author
More By This Author
- The Butterfly Effect of Women's Plight (1 comments)
- Thanks for a Great First Year (15 comments)
- The Internet Brain: Our Most Hopeful Approach to Cultural Harmony? (3 comments)
Related Posts
20 Comments... join the discussion!
-
-
These controversies are even more bizarre once you realize that it’s really not a debate at all. Evolution and religion are not mutually exclusive. As shown in the great documentary “What About God” they’re answering different questions.
http://spiritualmind.com/2009/07/what-about-god/
Evolution explains ‘how’, but only religion/spirituality can answer ‘why.’
↵ -
Yeah, but most religions describe the ‘how’ also. Some people see the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of a religion as a package deal, hence the conflict with evolution. But the way I see it (to use your words), the two are not mutually exclusive, and one is not obligated to accept both the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of a religion in order to be an adherent to said religion.
↵ -
Great point Ian.
↵ -
Such an important point, Ian, that is rarely brought up.
↵ -
I hope it will at least find it’s way to DVD here. I’d like to see it.
↵ -
I don’t necessarily buy that excuse. Has to be something else to this.
I don’t think creationism is more accepted than evolution in the United States.
Certainly the religious right seems to think so, but I certainly don’t consider them to be the majority.
↵ -
I am not surprised. Since evolution is “too controversial” for schools it has to be a no-no for the movies as well!
I am truly scared every time I think about fundamentalist (call them Christian Taliban) voting and making decisions in this (or any) country.
School district recalls band’s evolution t-shirt:
http://www.sedaliademocrat.com/news/0px-18740-span-font.html↵ -
A survey conducted in 2006 that ranked countries according to public acceptance of evolution placed the US at the bottom, out-idiocied only by Turkey.
http://www.livescience.com/health/060810_evo_rank.html
http://www.livescience.com/php/multimedia/imagedisplay/img_display.php?pic=060810_evo_rank_02.jpg39% Reject evolution and 21% are unsure, which leaves acceptance of evolution at 40%, a pretty clear minority.
↵ -
WOW. Thanks for the stats, Luke. I wouldn’t have thought that to be the case.
↵ -
Interesting point over at Andrew Sullivan, from a reader rebutting the idea that the Creationist/religious right is behind this. Here’s the gist:
“No, this is about the fact that distributors know that nobody in the US will pay to watch a movie about a 19th century scientist.”
Which is also plausible, less sinister, and still very sad.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/09/dissent-of-the-day-ii.html
↵ -
Tis a very good point. I think we can all accept that money wins over any other motivation most of the time.
↵ -
The whole socialism fear really is mildly entertaining when you are watching from over the ocean. I thought McCarthyist tendencies had since died and people had gotten over seeing healthcare for those poor who would be left to die otherwise as some sort of communist devil. If it weren’t for what is at stake, it would be hilarious.
↵ -
Why can’t I watch it? Do I really have to go to Canada to get a copy?
This is ridculous. This is why we’re stuck in a “fire and brimstone” stereotype to the rest of the world. How are we supposed to make progress as a country when we can’t even watch a “controversial” movie? If they don’t want to watch it, then don’t, but don’t take it away from other people.
↵ -
Well put, Ian. One note I’d like to add is that, WHEN compared as “Apples to Apples,” the argument between Evolution and Creationism is truly ridiculous. Sure, I will concede that Evolution may very well be a “theory” – one which, at maybe 99% proven, still lacks that extra 1% to make it fact. But the issue here is that Creationism has been blatantly DISPROVEN. That is something that the Sarah Palin-ites of this country just cannot wrap their mediocre minds around.
↵ -
Again, I think there’s a need for clarification.
Evolution is defined as: “…the change in the genetic material of a population of organisms from one generation to the next.”
That is a fact. Organisms evolve over time.
Why do they evolve? That is the theory.
↵ -
Such a marketing ploy. It’s betrays ignorance to generalize about the US in that way. If it really were a religious issue that made distributors hesitant to take on the film, then by definition this movie would sell a zillion ticket on the “secular coasts” of the USA.
It’s probably more likely that the movie is just bad and the producer is making excuses for it not selling here.
Dan
Casual Kitchen↵ -
Very confusing, because just from the trailer it looks very good. And from the reviews, it’s not really an evolution film. It’s centered more around Darwin’s life with his family and children. I can see where just saying the word evolution might stir people up and cause picketing of movie theaters. At least here in the South. But I doubt it wouldn’t be received really well in the metros like NYC, LA, and Chicago. Hopefully I can pick it up on DVD when it gets to that point.
↵ -
Hard to comment without knowing the reason, but if it is being censored it’s a sad day for the ‘land of the free’!
↵ -
Just wanted to expand a little on the role played by the word “theory” in this whole debate. In non-technical contexts, the word “theory” is used synonymously with the word “hypothesis” to mean something like “a conjecture which has yet to be verified”. In technical/scientific terms, however, a “theory” is a verified explanation accounting for known facts or phenomena, e.g. Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. That conservatives continue to argue that “evolution is just a theory” simply illustrates their own ignorance. Saying that evolution is just a theory is akin to saying that gravity is just a theory.
↵
