I've been wanting to write this piece for a while. I just didn't have the means or clarity of thought. That being said, I think I've found a good place to finally get it done. I love science. I love scientific study in all of its forms and I wholeheartedly believe scientific study is deeply rooted in God's call for humanity to have dominion over the Earth. It has produced a lot of good and will continue to do so. As a fan of science fiction, I embrace the very real worlds and phenomenon that take place in critically acclaimed stories by authors like Ray Bradbury, H.G. Wells and Frank Herbert.

Here's the thing:

I'm tired of men like Bill Nye and Neil Degrasse Tyson.

Before I go any further, let me clarify a few things. First, I believe both of these men are entitled to their worldview and their right to free speech is protected in the bill of rights just like it is for everyone else. Second, I acknowledge that my worldview differs from theirs greatly in terms of the origin of the universe and the destiny of human beings. Basically, I'm biased. Lastly, this article is not meant to serve as an argumentative piece against modern science nor is it designed to somehow discredit men like Tyson and Nye. I do happen to believe that the tenants of modern biology and astronomy are subject to debate and without proof, but that is an argument for another time.

Discrimination: the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age or sex.

My inspiration for this piece first came to me as a few years ago when I was browsing YouTube. On the front page, there was a featured video starring Bill Nye. It was a short video. I had grown up watching the "Science Guy" series in school, so I was pretty well aware of who he was. The video was titled "Creationism is not appropriate for children." In it, Nye explains his position that not only should creationism not be taught in schools, it shouldn't be taught to children at all. He implores creationist parents not to teach creationism to their children. His reasoning? Because "we need scientifically literate taxpayers and voters." What Bill Nye is actually saying is "we need taxpayers and voters that agree with my bias."

I respect Bill Nye, but ever since the Ken Ham debate, it seems like all of his arguments boil down to domestic policy and not science. He's literally saying that creationists can't be engineers or science teachers. Heck, they can't even vote. He argues that dissent in the scientific consensus is dangerous. The problem with this line of thinking is simple: arguing that one cannot do something based on their religious beliefs is discrimination. Plain and simple.

Consider a more recent example. The flat Earth craze (if there even was such a thing) seems to have come and gone. But while it was at its peak, Neil Degrasse Tyson stopped by on the set of "The Nightly Show" in order to confront rapper B.O.B. about his flat earth beliefs. He could have stopped at slamming B.O.B.'s ignorance, but instead, he chose to throw an entire group of people in a box. He made borderline paranoid claims about a "growing anti-intellectual strain" that could mark the end of our informed society. He later said, In a free society, you can and should believe whatever you want. If you want to believe the world is flat, go right ahead. But if you believe the world is flat, and you have influence over others... then being wrong becomes being harmful." Yet another argument for domestic policy and not science.

I could quote plenty of other examples of anti-religious sentiment from acclaimed scientists. Lawrence Krauss even went so far as to call the teaching of creationism child abuse. What? Or how about Seth MacFarlane's self-serving episode of "Family Guy" where the whole town shuns main character Brian for being an atheist? Way to stroke your ego, Seth. Please, tell me more about how you're being treated unfairly and everyone is against you because you don't believe in God. It's funny how all of the men I've mentioned in this article also like to use the phrase "denying science" as if it is some act of treason.

My goal in this is to bring to light a growing paranoia among popular intellectuals such as Nye and Tyson. They somehow have come to believe that not only is creationism false, but it's holding society back. It isn't. To suggest such a thing is outrageous. Belief in God is not beyond reason nor does it somehow make me or anyone else less intelligent or capable of creativity or critical thinking. Believing such a thing about someone who believes in God is discriminatory and hypocritical.

For years, atheists like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens whined and moaned about being ignored in the political realm because they were atheists. Now, admittedly, their voice is growing louder and louder, and the atheist movement is still gaining traction. What do they do now that they have been heard and gained something of an upper hand? Discriminate against the very group of people they claimed discriminated against them. It's "Footloose" except the paranoia about dancing is replaced with paranoia concerning creationism. These men try to tell parents what they can and cannot do. They have no right and are despicable for trying.

Teaching creationism is not child abuse. It isn't harmful to the health and wealth of a free society. It doesn't promote anti-intellectual sentiment. What it does is create a perfectly legitimate debate that is healthy and should be had. Just because someone disagrees with you or has a different worldview does not somehow make them out to get you nor does it make them beneath you. Gentlemen, stop discriminating and get over yourselves. Get back to real science, not political lollygagging.