Monday, December 1, 2014


News Clips For The Day


Ferguson And Police Nationwide – Five Related Articles


After Ferguson, what's next for Darren Wilson?
CBS NEWS December 1, 2014, 6:59 AM

Officer Darren Wilson will leave the Ferguson police department after less than three years of service with no severance package, pension or benefits. Ending nearly a week of negotiations, Wilson resigned citing threats against fellow officers as his motivation reports CBS News correspondent Vladimir Duthiers.

"They got some intelligence that suggested there were going to be some targets at the Ferguson Police Department and the minute he said that, he also indicated that he thought his resignation might alleviate some of those threats," one of Wilson's attorneys Neil Bruntrager said. "They had some intel that suggested there was going to be some action of a violent nature."

In his letter to officials, Wilson stated he would have liked to stay on the force "...but the safety of other police officers and the community are of paramount importance to me. It is my hope that my resignation will allow the community to heal."

But emotions in Ferguson are still raw following a grand jury's decision not to indict Wilson for the shooting death of unarmed black teenager Michael Brown. A small but vocal group continues to gather outside Ferguson's police department.

Prior to Sunday's football game in Saint Louis, five Rams players came on to the field with their arms raised, a show of support for the "hands up don't shoot" movement.

The gesture drew a strong reaction from the Saint Louis police Officers Association. In a statement, they said they were "profoundly disappointed" with the players' decision to "engage in a display that police officers around the nation found tasteless, offensive and inflammatory."

Outside of the stadium, demonstrators chanted and blocked traffic -- six were arrested.

Bruntrager said Wilson hopes he can move forward.

"Going forward I think he wants to translate as much of this event as he can into a teachable moment and I think he wants to share with people the lessons he learned. And I hope he does."

Darren Wilson has a new wife and a child on the way. And while his wife works for the Ferguson police department, Wilson is now unemployed. People have been trying to keep their income afloat with vigorous online fundraising efforts.




“Officer Darren Wilson will leave the Ferguson police department after less than three years of service with no severance package, pension or benefits.... Prior to Sunday's football game in Saint Louis, five Rams players came on to the field with their arms raised, a show of support for the "hands up don't shoot" movement. The gesture drew a strong reaction from the Saint Louis police Officers Association. In a statement, they said they were "profoundly disappointed" with the players' decision to "engage in a display that police officers around the nation found tasteless, offensive and inflammatory."... "Going forward I think he wants to translate as much of this event as he can into a teachable moment and I think he wants to share with people the lessons he learned. And I hope he does."

“... I think he wants to share with people the lessons he learned.” Will he become an advocate for better community relations? How will he “share” his lessons with others? In the meantime Wilson and his family are having serious financial problems, and “people” are making “vigorous online fundraising efforts.” See website – http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/31/darren-wilson-fundraiser-support_n_5745858.html – concerning two GoFundMe websites for the benefit of Wilson and his family. Both have been shut down by Wilson himself. That article was dated September 1, 2014. Today's article states that efforts at fund raising are continuing.






Obama To Meet Civil Rights Leaders To Talk About Mistrust Of Police – NPR
Eyder Peralta
December 01, 2014

After another day of mostly peaceful protests in Ferguson, Mo., President Obama is scheduled to meet with civil rights leaders to discuss mistrust of police in communities of color.

A White House official said Obama will also meet elected officials, and community and faith leaders, "to discuss how communities and law enforcement can work together to build trust to strengthen neighborhoods across the country."

Of course, the series of meetings comes after a grand jury decided not to indict Darren Wilson in the killing of Michael Brown. The decision led to a couple of days of protests, in which demonstrators set fire to vehicles and buildings while police fired upon the crowd with tear gas.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that six demonstrators were arrested on Sunday after they demonstrated outside the Rams game and at local chain stores like Target.

The paper spoke to one protester at a downtown plaza:

" 'Our rights are taken away from us every single day, and we usually give up but we stuck to this,' said demonstrator LaShell Eikerenkoetter, 25, of Jennings. 'There are voices that aren't out here but my voice is out here for them.'

"Eikerenkoetter, hoarse from yelling, said she's been protesting since a Ferguson police officer shot Michael Brown on Aug. 9, and plans to continue."

The White House, for its part, said Obama had scheduled today's meetings in response to the recent events in Ferguson.

"As the country has witnessed, disintegration of trust between law enforcement agencies and the people they protect and serve can destabilize communities, undermine the legitimacy of the criminal justice system, undermine public safety, create resentment in local communities, and make the job of delivering police services less safe and more difficult," the White House official added.

Obama is also scheduled to meet with his Cabinet, which is considering changes to a federal program that delivers equipment to local and state police.




"'Our rights are taken away from us every single day, and we usually give up but we stuck to this,' said demonstrator LaShell Eikerenkoetter, 25, of Jennings. 'There are voices that aren't out here but my voice is out here for them.'... 'As the country has witnessed, disintegration of trust between law enforcement agencies and the people they protect and serve can destabilize communities, undermine the legitimacy of the criminal justice system, undermine public safety, create resentment in local communities, and make the job of delivering police services less safe and more difficult," the White House official added. Obama is also scheduled to meet with his Cabinet, which is considering changes to a federal program that delivers equipment to local and state police.”

I want to see some effective laws put forth to limit the power of the individual policeman or police department to do whatever they want to in the street and by whatever means they choose. Their duty should be to arrest criminals under the rule of law including probably cause rather than racial profiling, not harass and intimidate community members, and certainly not to be judge, jury and executioner. Local courts need some scrutiny, too, as they too often back up the police arrests without placing any restraint on their behavior during the arrest. This happens on the local and state levels more than the federal. I hope that Obama's meetings with the various groups will work to clean up the corrupt practices that have become too commonplace and set up community interactions that will increase trust. I would like to see a community run review board in every city to receive citizen complaints on officer malfeasance. I also want to see those machine guns and tanks, etc., that have been transferred from the Pentagon to city police forces given back to the Pentagon. They would come to very good use in Iraq and Syria in the hands of the Kurds and any other group there who are not enemies of the USA, and who are able to put up a good fight against ISIS.





St. Louis Rams players show apparent solidarity with Ferguson demonstrators – CBS
AP November 30, 2014, 4:33 PM

ST. LOUIS - Five St. Louis Rams players stood with their arms raised in an apparent show of solidarity for Ferguson protesters before trotting onto the field for pregame introductions.

A Rams spokesman said Sunday the team was not aware the gesture had been planned before the game against Oakland.

Wide receivers Tavon Austin and Kenny Britt came out together first, with the move obscured by a smoke machine in the upper reaches of the Edward Jones Dome. Stedman Bailey, Jared Cook and Chris Givens - all of whom are black - then came out and stood together with arms raised.

After Tre Mason scored on an 8-yard run to make it 45-0 in the fourth quarter, he and Britt raised their hands together.

There have been riots, looting and buildings burned in Ferguson since a grand jury declined Monday to indict police officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of unarmed Michael Brown in August.

Across the street from the stadium, about 75 protesters gathered in the second half as about 30 police wearing riot gear watched from a safe distance. Protesters chanted "Hands up, don't shoot!" ''No Justice, No Football!" ''This is what Democracy looks like," and "We're here for Mike Brown."

Protesters and police clashed during a demonstration after the game. Police arrested protest organizer Bishop Derrick Robinson in the confrontation. He was later released, vowing to continue the demonstrations. Robinson has been leader of several peaceful protests since Brown's death.

The Rams had additional security measures in place for the game, including armed personnel from the National Guard. The team has warned fans outside entrances all season.

On another front inside the stadium, a group of fans formed letters spelling "Keep the Rams in St. Louis" in seats in the north end zone.




Yesterday's evening TV new on CBS stated that the police union is enraged over this demonstration by 5 football players. They had better get used to feeling enraged, because many more people are going to speak out against unnecessary police violence as times go on. This feels like a “movement” to me and not just local unrest in one city. The problem is nationwide, and so will the community responses be. I have stated what kind of law I would like to see at the previous news article. Local governments from police, mayor and courts have not been as responsible and fair as I would like to see. I hope this awakening of community response will make deep-seated changes for blacks and other poor people who have to live in low rent districts that are too often full of crime.




Ferguson Mayor: Police Will Recruit More Minorities – NPR
Scott Neuman
November 30, 2014

The mayor of Ferguson, Mo., says he plans to launch a number of initiatives to calm tensions in the the city in the wake of the fatal police shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown.

James Knowles, speaking at a news conference today, said the city was creating a civilian review board that would provide input on police affairs. He also said the city would begin a scholarship program to recruit more black officers in the town where African-Americans make up more than half the population but only a handful of the police force.

The aim of the program, Knowles said, is to create a police force that is "more reflective of the demographics of Ferguson." He added that the city wants to be "proactive with the next academy class" because it would take time to get new minority recruits trained and on the streets.

Knowles said Ferguson would also increase a stipend to officers living in the city from $100 to $300 a month.

Earlier, Neil Bruntrager, an attorney for Darren Wilson, the officer who shot and killed Brown and whose resignation from the force became public yesterday, told The Associated Pressthat his client had decided to resign because "the information we had was that there would be actions targeting the Ferguson (police) department or buildings in Ferguson related to the police department."

But although Police Chief Thomas Jackson acknowledged that threats had been made, Knowles said he was unaware of any specific threat leading to Wilson's decision to step down.

Knowles said he had not asked for Wilson's resignation and that there had been "no severance agreement" involved.

"I think it's best that at this time we continue to move on as a community," the mayor told reporters.

Jackson said that he had no intention himself of resigning.

The news conference today follows a night in which a few hundred people protested in Ferguson over a grand jury's decision last week not to indict Wilson over the killing.

The St. Louis Post Dispatch says that "outside the Ferguson police department, about 150 to 200 protesters gathered to chant and wave signs and flags. At about 8:45 p.m., they marched South on South Florissant Road." The newspaper says one arrest was made after a man threw a bottle at police.

St. Louis Public Radio live blogged the evening's marches and protests here.

In Portland, Ore., police made 10 arrests in a demonstration related to events in Ferguson.
As we reported on Saturday, in his resignation letter, Wilson said his quitting the force "will allow the community to heal.

"It was my hope to continue in police work, but the safety of other police officers and the community are of paramount importance to me," he wrote.

Wilson had been on administrative leave since the Aug. 9 shooting.




“James Knowles, speaking at a news conference today, said the city was creating a civilian review board that would provide input on police affairs. He also said the city would begin a scholarship program to recruit more black officers in the town where African-Americans make up more than half the population but only a handful of the police force. The aim of the program, Knowles said, is to create a police force that is "more reflective of the demographics of Ferguson." He added that the city wants to be "proactive with the next academy class" because it would take time to get new minority recruits trained and on the streets. Knowles said Ferguson would also increase a stipend to officers living in the city from $100 to $300 a month.... "I think it's best that at this time we continue to move on as a community," the mayor told reporters. Jackson said that he had no intention himself of resigning.... In Portland, Ore., police made 10 arrests in a demonstration related to events in Ferguson.
As we reported on Saturday, in his resignation letter, Wilson said his quitting the force "will allow the community to heal. "It was my hope to continue in police work, but the safety of other police officers and the community are of paramount importance to me," he wrote.”

Recruiting minority police officers, creating a civilian review board, and giving an increased stipend to police officers who chose to live in Ferguson are all good, important steps and give me hope for the future. I'm impressed by Mayor Knowles initiatives, and am looking forward to progress there. See the following article about Knowles:

James Knowles III
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

James Knowles III (born 1980) is an American politician. He was first elected Mayor of the city of Ferguson, Missouri, in April 2011. Knowles, who was 31-years old at the time of his election, became the youngest mayor in Ferguson's history, as well one of the youngest mayors in Saint Louis County and the state of Missouri at the time.[1][2] Theshooting of Michael Brown and ongoing unrest occurred in 2014 during Knowles' tenure.[3]

Early life and education[edit]

Knowles received bachelor's degrees in political science and criminal justice from Truman State University in Kirksville, Missouri in 2002.[2] He graduated from the University of Missouri–St. Louis in 2008 with a master's degree in public policy administration.[4][5]

Career[edit]

A member of the Republican Party, Knowles is a former chairman of the Missouri Young Republicans.[4] Knowles was a staff member for former Missouri state Senator and Democrat Ted House.[6] He is a former employee of theFerguson Police Department, serving nearly four years in the department's communications division.[7][citation needed]

Knowles served on the Ferguson city council prior to becoming mayor.[1] Knowles was elected Mayor in thenonpartisan election on April 5, 2011, winning 49% of the vote.[1] He defeated two challengers, Pearce Neikirk, a realtor, and former Ferguson mayor Steve Wegert.[1] Voter turnout for the most recent mayoral election was extremely low at just 12 percent.[1] Knowles publicly expressed disappointment with the low voter turnout at an April 2014 city council meeting.[3]





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/eight-white-cops-one-hispanic-cop-sue-cleveland-over-alleged-racial-discrimination/

8 white cops, 1 Hispanic cop sue Cleveland over alleged racial bias
CBS/AP November 30, 2014, 1:19 PM

CLEVELAND - Nine non-African American Cleveland police officers involved in a deadly 2012 police shooting that killed two people accuse the police department of racial discrimination in a federal lawsuit against the city.

The lawsuit filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Cleveland by eight white officers and one Hispanic officer says the department treats non-black officers involved in shootings of blacks more harshly than black officers. Messages seeking comment from city officials Sunday weren't immediately returned.

Dozens of officers were involved in the November 2012 high-speed chase. Thirteen officers fired more than 100 shots at the vehicle, killing both unarmed people inside.

The lawsuit says officers who shot were put on administrative leave and on periods of restricted duty. The lawsuit seeking unspecified damages alleges discrimination and civil rights violations.

Cleveland's police department has been dealing with the fallout from the chase, which involved five dozen cruisers and wove through residential neighborhoods, onto Interstate 90 and eventually ended with gunfire in East Cleveland. Officers fired 137 shots.

Driver Timothy Russell and passenger Malissa Williams were both black, and no weapon was found. The police union has defended the officers' actions and said the driver was trying to ram them.

In May, a grand jury indicted six of the officers involved in the incident.

Patrol officer Michael Brelo, indicted on manslaughter charges, fired at least 15 shots, including fatal shots, while standing on the hood of the car after the vehicle was trapped by police cruisers and other officers had stopped firing.

"The driver was fully stopped. Escape was no longer even a remote possibility. The flight was over," Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Tim McGinty said.

He said a U.S. Supreme Court ruling earlier this year made clear that officers are prohibited from firing on suspects after a threat to public safety has ended.

McGinty said the five supervisors indicted ignored departmental policies on chases.
"They ignored their own training. They put the public at risk. They put the officers under their command at risk," McGinty said.




“The lawsuit filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Cleveland by eight white officers and one Hispanic officer says the department treats non-black officers involved in shootings of blacks more harshly than black officers. Messages seeking comment from city officials Sunday weren't immediately returned.... The lawsuit says officers who shot were put on administrative leave and on periods of restricted duty. The lawsuit seeking unspecified damages alleges discrimination and civil rights violations.... Driver Timothy Russell and passenger Malissa Williams were both black, and no weapon was found. The police union has defended the officers' actions and said the driver was trying to ram them. In May, a grand jury indicted six of the officers involved in the incident. Patrol officer Michael Brelo, indicted on manslaughter charges, fired at least 15 shots, including fatal shots, while standing on the hood of the car after the vehicle was trapped by police cruisers and other officers had stopped firing. "The driver was fully stopped. Escape was no longer even a remote possibility. The flight was over," Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Tim McGinty said.... McGinty said the five supervisors indicted ignored departmental policies on chases. They ignored their own training. They put the public at risk. They put the officers under their command at risk," McGinty said.”

This car chase was the worst I've ever heard described, second to the New York City motorcycle riot of a couple of years ago when an Asian man in his SUV was dragged from his car and beaten. Interestingly, a number of those motorcycle riders turned out to be police officers riding in the rowdy gang during their time off. I think police officers many times just aren't very well selected, and that is part of why they get involved in violence so often. They're wearing a uniform, but they have the mentality of bullies. In both cases, a gang mentality was involved and was characterized by brutality. I don't care if those police officers were black, white, or purple, they should go to jail for what they did. According to the article they were all supervisors, and in charge of the debacle. They were also going against their orders and training in this car chase, and against a recent ruling by the US Supreme Court. They seem to feel that they are above the law.





Uruguayans vote for continuity, and legal weed
AP December 1, 2014, 2:52 AM

MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay -- Tabare Vazquez's victory in Uruguay's presidential election is a show of support for the leftist coalition that has governed the country for the past decade and allows the government to proceed with itsplan to create the world's first state-run marijuana marketplace.

Vazquez, a 74-year-old oncologist who was president from 2005 to 2010, topped center-right rival Luis Lacalle Pou of the National Party 53 percent to 40 percent in Sunday's vote.

The runoff vote drew international attention after Lacalle Pou promised to undo much of the pioneering plan to put the government in charge of regulating the production, distribution and sale of marijuana on a nationwide scale. Vazquez, meanwhile, said he would proceed with it, unless it produced negative results.

As results came in, Lacalle Pou called Vazquez to concede and wish him "great success," while supporters of Vazquez's Broad Front coalition poured into the streets to celebrate.

In his victory speech, Vazquez called on the opposition to join him in a national accord to deal with the issues of public security, health and education. "I want to be able to count on all Uruguayans, but not so they follow me, so they guide me, accompany me."

Sunday's win marked a reversal of roles for Vazquez, who shook up Uruguayan politics when he became president the first time, peacefully ending 170 years of two-party dominance. In his first presidential campaign, Vazquez promised changes that would "shake the roots of the trees." But he governed as a relatively cautious moderate, avoiding the constitutional changes and polarization that have shaken countries such as Venezuela.

His popularity on leaving office paved the way for the election of his successor, current President Jose Mujica, a former guerrilla known for his humble lifestyle and straight talk. Both men belong to the Broad Front coalition, which has been in power for a decade and has passed laws same-sex marriage, abortion and marijuana.

This time around, Mujica's popularity and a strong economy helped propel Vazquez into office, where he is now seen as the candidate of continuity, not of change.

Javier Silva, an operator at a state electrical plant, said he voted for Vazquez because he thinks the country is doing well.

"The economy is rising. The country isn't anything like it was 10 or 20 years ago, when it was in decline," said the 35-year-old.

Monica Centurion, an official at a state hospital, said she voted for Lacalle Pou because of his pledge to improve public security, which "is the principal issue."

Vazquez immediately moved to calm fears that he would introduce radical change in his second term.

"Within the Constitution and the law everything. Outside the Constitution and the law nothing," he told party militants after his win was announced.

Lacalle Pou is the son of another ex-president, Luis Alberto Lacalle Herrera, who governed from 1990 to 1995.

During his campaign, he criticized the marijuana plan, saying he would shut down the state-run pot market, while allowing domestic cultivation of the plant. Polls show that despite its international popularity, most Uruguayans oppose the marijuana laws and want them repealed. Uruguayan authorities are still in the process of rolling out the pot marketplace.

Lacalle Pou was hobbled by some voters' wariness of a return to the traditional parties that ruled through most of the country's usually peaceful history, apart from a 1973-1985 military dictatorship.

Vazquez, the tall and trim son of an oil worker, grew up in a working class neighborhood of Montevideo and went on to achieve a medical degree. He continued seeing patients one day a week during his previous presidency, but said in a recent interview that he would give up medicine to focus on the presidency if elected.

In the first round of voting in October, he fell just short of an outright victory, getting 48 percent support against 31 percent for Lacalle Pou. Mujica was barred by law from running for a second consecutive term.




“Tabare Vazquez's victory in Uruguay's presidential election is a show of support for the leftist coalition that has governed the country for the past decade and allows the government to proceed with its plan to create the world's first state-run marijuana marketplace. Vazquez, a 74-year-old oncologist who was president from 2005 to 2010, topped center-right rival Luis Lacalle Pou of the National Party 53 percent to 40 percent in Sunday's vote.... In his victory speech, Vazquez called on the opposition to join him in a national accord to deal with the issues of public security, health and education. "I want to be able to count on all Uruguayans, but not so they follow me, so they guide me, accompany me."... Javier Silva, an operator at a state electrical plant, said he voted for Vazquez because he thinks the country is doing well. "The economy is rising. The country isn't anything like it was 10 or 20 years ago, when it was in decline," said the 35-year-old. Monica Centurion, an official at a state hospital, said she voted for Lacalle Pou because of his pledge to improve public security, which "is the principal issue." Vazquez immediately moved to calm fears that he would introduce radical change in his second term.”

A state run marijuana marketplace will probably bring in millions of dollars for the government, especially if people around the world buy from them. The oncologist Tabare Vaszuez is described as a center leftist, but his stated goals are pretty much what I would want in this country. – . public security, health and education. According to Silva “the economy is rising” and Vazquez calmed fears that he would introduce “radical change.”

Wikipedia describes US/Uruguay relations as “based on a common outlook and emphasis on democratic ideals..... In 2002, Uruguay and the U.S. created a Joint Commission on Trade and Investment (JCTI) to exchange ideas on a variety of economic topics. In March 2003, the JCTI identified six areas of concentration until the eventual signing of theFree Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA): customs issues, intellectual property protection, investment, labor,environment, and trade in goods. In late 2004, Uruguay and the U.S. signed an Open Skies Agreement, which was ratified in May 2006. In November 2005, they signed a Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT), which entered into force on November 1, 2006. A Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) was signed in January 2007. More than 80 U.S.-owned companies operate in Uruguay, and many more market U.S. goods and services.” In other words, they are friends rather than competitors at best, like some Central and South American countries.





Does It Matter Who Accepts Evolution? – NPR
Tania Lombrozo
December 01, 2014

Since 1982, Gallup has been tracking the American public's views on human origins, providing three mutually exclusive options from which to choose. According to the most recent poll, 42 percent of Americans endorse the idea that God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years or so, 31 percent say that humans evolved over millions of years with God guiding the process, and 19 percent say that humans evolved over millions of years with no role for God at all.

These numbers suggest a deeply divided nation, which helps explain why questions about human origins have been contentious in the context of public school education and beyond. But a new report* by sociologist Jonathan Hill argues that the Gallup numbers have been painting a misleading picture of what Americans truly believe — and of how invested they are in their views.

Hill asked a representative sample of more than 3,000 Americans detailed questions about their beliefs concerning human origins and he found that many people's views fall within the cracks of the standard Gallup poll options. For example, according to the new report, a majority of creationists believe that God created humans in their present form — but this majority doesn't believe that it occurred within the 10,000-year window that closest Gallup poll option allows. Hill also found that when given the option, a considerable 39 percent of his sample said they were unsure or held views that defied simple classification — for example, rejecting the view that humans evolved from earlier species as well as the idea that humans were created by God.

The most surprising finding from Hill's report is that, for many Americans, not much hangs on getting it right when it comes to our evolutionary past. Hill asked respondents how important it is to them personally to have "correct" beliefs about human origins. He found that a majority — 56 percent — indicated that it was "not at all," "not very," or only "somewhat" important to them to have the right beliefs. This percentage, however, was not uniform across groups of respondents. Some 64 percent of creationists (who made up 37 percent of the sample) indicated that having the right beliefs was "very" or "extremely" important. The percentages were lower for all other groups: 35 percent for those who endorsed theistic evolution (16 percent of the sample), 48 percent for those who endorsed atheistic evolution (9 percent of the sample), and 23 percent for those who were unsure or didn't fall into the preceding categories (39 percent of the sample).

At first blush, these levels of apathy or ambivalence seem hard to reconcile with the sense that questions of human origins are fraught with cultural tension. But they might also point to what that tension is really about — not (just) the question of whether and how our species evolved, but broader epistemic and moral values. Debates about evolution and creation are in no small part, I suspect, about how we can come to have knowledge of the world and of ourselves in the first place. Through sacred texts? Through the testimony of religious authorities? Through personal revelation? Or through systematic empirical investigation and reason — that is, through science and philosophical argumentation?

Identifying as a creationist or accepting evolution might communicate more than an isolated belief about human origins — it might signal something about a person's approach to the world, including the values and sources of evidence that she thinks should guide public policy, law enforcement, biomedical research, and so on. In fact, those respondents in Hill's survey who said that beliefs about human origins were "very" or "extremely" important frequently raised ideas about evidence and authority in their responses. Among the most common themes were appeals to God and the bible among creationists, and subscribing to facts and reason among those who espoused evolution without godly intervention.

This, I think, is why it really matters who accepts evolution: Questions of human origins aren't uniquely at stake. There's a broader cultural conversation folded into the mix, and it's one that involves some of our deepest and most consequential commitments.

Of course, it also matters who accepts evolution for more immediate and practical reasons. Antibiotic resistance is a common example: How we use antibiotics affects selection pressures on bacteria, with consequences for how they evolve and the risk of inadvertently creating superbugs. Less commonly known is that through a similar process, cancer treatment affects the evolution of cancer cells within an organism, an insight with potential implications for current practices in cancer therapy. And understanding the ecological impacts of climate change similarly requires an evolutionary perspective. These cases — and many others — illustrate why it matters that the voting, fossil-fuel burning, antibiotic-using public accept evolution.

So, had I been a respondent in Hill's poll, I likely would have found myself in the minority who think it matters that we get it right when it comes to human origins — not just because it's important to me personally, but because it's important for the human species.

Author's Note: I learned about Jonathan Hill's report from an article at The Atlantic, and obtained an advance copy directly from the author. The report will soon be available to the public on the website of the BioLogos Foundation, a private organization established by Dr. Francis Collins of Human Genome Project fame that "invites the church and the world to see the harmony between science and biblical faith" as they "present an evolutionary understanding of God's creation." The BioLogos Foundation funded Jonathan Hill's research; the work in the report has not yet undergone peer review.

Tania Lombrozo is a psychology professor at the University of California Berkeley. She writes about psychology, cognitive science and philosophy, with occasional forays into parenting and veganism. You can keep up with more of what Tania Lombrozo is thinking on Twitter: @TaniaLombrozo




“But a new report* by sociologist Jonathan Hill argues that the Gallup numbers have been painting a misleading picture of what Americans truly believe — and of how invested they are in their views. Hill asked a representative sample of more than 3,000 Americans detailed questions about their beliefs concerning human origins and he found that many people's views fall within the cracks of the standard Gallup poll options.... a considerable 39 percent of his sample said they were unsure or held views that defied simple classification — for example, rejecting the view that humans evolved from earlier species as well as the idea that humans were created by God.... Hill asked respondents how important it is to them personally to have "correct" beliefs about human origins. He found that a majority — 56 percent — indicated that it was "not at all," "not very," or only "somewhat" important to them to have the right beliefs.....  Debates about evolution and creation are in no small part, I suspect, about how we can come to have knowledge of the world and of ourselves in the first place. Through sacred texts? Through the testimony of religious authorities? Through personal revelation? Or through systematic empirical investigation and reason — that is, through science and philosophical argumentation?... Of course, it also matters who accepts evolution for more immediate and practical reasons. Antibiotic resistance is a common example: How we use antibiotics affects selection pressures on bacteria, with consequences for how they evolve and the risk of inadvertently creating superbugs. Less commonly known is that through a similar process, cancer treatment affects the evolution of cancer cells within an organism, an insight with potential implications for current practices in cancer therapy. And understanding the ecological impacts of climate change similarly requires an evolutionary perspective.”

It seems to me that what is being discussed in this article is not just the entrenched religious right and their anti-scientific beliefs versus the free-thinking minority who go to a UU church or no church at all. This minority is where I fall, and it matters very much to me that our society operates under rules that are set by scientific facts, logic, peer-reviewed knowledge sources, the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, and the freedom of every citizen to vote without some right wing political party manipulating the laws in order to stifle the vote on the left and in the middle of the road. I feel strongly that a free and healthy access to the Internet must be available to everyone, as it has become the main communication method for private individuals, the news media, and groups that advocate specific viewpoints. I want to be able to go to the Internet and read DailyKos and The Christian Left, do my blog freely, and research any subject on earth. I want to remain sure that the religious right will not succeed in taking over our government and perverting what is taught in schools, what organizations I can support, or preventing access to what is happening in race relations and the lives of the poor in general around the nation.