Creationist Ken Ham explains the Virginia Tech tragedy and science

[Questioninggeller]

On day after the tragic murder of 33 people, Ken Ham (of Answers in Genesis) tries to score social points by blaming the shootings on...

How Could a Loving God ... ?
More school violence in America

by Ken Ham, President, AiG-US April 16, 2007

Keywords author-ken-ham school-violence suffering

...
It’s also important to understand a concept that AiG presents in the book How Could a Loving God … ? We read there:

Only the person who believes in God has a basis to make moral judgments to determine what is “good” and what is “bad.” Those who claim God does not exist have absolutely no authority upon which to call something right or wrong. If God doesn’t exist, who can objectively define what is good and what is bad? What basis could there be to make such judgments? The atheist has no basis upon which to call anything good or bad. They can talk about good and bad, and right and wrong—but it’s all relative, it’s all arbitrary. What’s “good” in one person’s mind might be completely “bad” in another’s.

...
We live in an era when public high schools and colleges have all but banned God from science classes. In these classrooms, students are taught that the whole universe, including plants and animals—and humans—arose by natural processes. Naturalism (in essence, atheism) has become the religion of the day and has become the foundation of the education system (and Western culture as a whole). The more such a philosophy permeates the culture, the more we would expect to see a sense of purposelessness and hopelessness that pervades people’s thinking. In fact, the more a culture allows the killing of the unborn, the more we will see people treating life in general as “cheap.”

I’m not at all saying that the person who committed these murders at Virginia Tech was driven by a belief in millions of years or evolution. I don’t know why this person did what he did, except the obvious: that it was a result of sin. However, when we see such death and violence, it is a reminder to us that without God’s Word (and the literal history in Genesis 1–11), people will not understand why such things happen.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/04/16/how-could-loving-god

So Ham incorrectly ties science into the claim that life is considered cheap. Then he says he doesn't blame evolution on the murders.

Ken Ham can't even give the victims and their families time to grieve. The day after he launches into attacking something he doesn't even understand. What a disgusting human being.

On a side note, evolution took "billions" not millions.

Read more at: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/04/contemptible_ghoul_2.php

Its worth noting the guman was not an atheist:

Va. Tech gunman writings raised concerns
By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer
April 17, 2007

...
Cho indicated in his letter that the end was near and that there was a deed to be done, the official said. He also expressed disappointment in his own religion, and made several references to Christianity, the official said.
...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070417/ap_on_re_us/virginia_tech_shooting

 

[Asolepius]

I think I am fairly clear on what is evil, and Ken Ham and his ilk are it. In a way though, it's good to be goaded by his undiluted rubbish. It lends more power to my pen (or keyboard).

 

[l0rca]

More and more, after becoming confident that atheism, or at least agnosticism, is the most rational choice one can make, I find myself falling into an escapist mentality towards religion. In my mind, I am ready to move on, and spiritually percieve the world in a natural, belonging way. These sorts of reckless religious conjectures really interfere with my peace of mind. I feel, much like Newton must have, that my consciousness has taken form a few centuries too early.

I'm going back to my book now. Rouse me when intelligence reigns.

 

[osmosis]

I'm going back to my book now. Rouse me when intelligence reigns.

I hope that's a very long book you've got there.

 

[Schneibster]

What a disgusting human being.

My first reaction was almost precisely this; my only addition is, "what a disgusting excuse for a human being."

The part about not being able to have morals without jebus is the absolute capper of all. Yet another one who doesn't understand that morals are for children, who aren't intelligent enough to be trusted to use ethics. Adults exist to teach children morals first, and then to explain to them how to understand the underlying ethics so that they can make their own good judgements. People like this pervert or ignore that duty, because they're lazy and don't want to have to teach ethics, or because they're stupid and can't understand them.

Here's a little clue: apparently, according to the murderer's note, he found the people he murdered morally repugnant. Gee, I wonder whose religion got used making that particular judgment? Not mine; I'm an atheist.