The Arrogance Of The Ignorant

“Sadducees came to [Jesus], who say that there is no resurrection. And they asked him a question, saying, ‘Teacher, Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies and leaves a wife, but leaves no child, the man must take the widow and raise up offspring for his brother. There were seven brothers; the first took a wife, and when he died left no offspring. And the second took her, and died, leaving no offspring. And the third likewise. And the seven left no offspring. Last of all the woman also died. In the resurrection, when they rise again, whose wife will she be? For the seven had her as wife.’

“Jesus said to them, ‘Is this not the reason you are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God? For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. And as for the dead being raised, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the passage about the bush, how God spoke to him, saying, “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?” He is not God of the dead, but of the living. You are quite wrong.’” [1]

If you listen to political debate on current “hot” topics, you are quickly struck by the ignorance displayed by those with the loudest voices. For instance, in the United States, unrest swirled around the issue of abortion on demand because the Supreme Court returned the matter to the states where the issue should have been decided over fifty years ago. Abortion activists and their political lackeys cried out that the decision destroyed democracy. Think about that! How can a decision to return the issue to the people destroy the opportunity of the people to decide an issue?

In July of this past year, following the Dobbs decision by the SCOTUS the United States Senate held hearings on the status of the abortion debate. What was astounding to even the casual viewer was that those advocating abortion on demand were incapable of defining the most basis questions! What is a woman? Can a man have a baby? How is encouraging a vote on a matter destroying democracy? Yet the witnesses produced by abortion advocates were unable to answer such basic questions.

What was worse, these same witnesses were proven arrogant in their ignorance. Refusing to answer question posed to them, they deflected, saying that they preferred to answer more interesting questions! Or they redefined basic concepts and demanded that the Senators questioning them speak only according to the woke concepts that the “witnesses” were producing. Truly the ignorant were proven arrogant.

Or how about the gun debate both here in Canada and in the United States? As I listen to multiple politicians speak, they make utterly absurd statements that cause anyone with a modicum of experience to shake their head. Powerful leaders throw out stupid arguments to support crazy positions. We hear frivolous arguments that deer don’t wear Kevlar vests, so no one needs a high-powered rifle. These are politicians who don’t know the difference between a “clip” and a “magazine,” or who are unaware of the difference between a “bullet” and a “cartridge,” and yet they want to be taken seriously.

Or you may have heard that no one needs a magazine that holds more than ten rounds for any firearm, noting that those making this particular argument almost inevitably use the word “clip” rather than speaking of a magazine. If someone needs protection, these brilliant politicians argue, that is why we have judges to issue restraining orders and police whom we can call to protect us. However, people know that restraining orders are only as good as the obedience of those against whom such orders are issued. If the person is not inclined to obey the law, the restraining order is worse than worthless. And those who permit themselves to think know that when facing a threat that requires one to act within seconds, it is somewhat less than comforting to know that the police are mere minutes away.

We read of school boards in the United States that want to abandon the Pledge of Allegiance because that pledge contains the words “under God.” The words don’t align with the schools’ diversity, equity, and inclusion values. [2] Incredible!

Political discourse has grown coarse, and the abusive language employed when speaking of those with whom we disagree grows increasingly corrosive. We allow ourselves to be segregated into tribes defined by novel criteria that separate us into increasingly hostile units. We are quick to anathematise those with whom we disagree, refusing to hear what they think, relegating them to a class we view as somewhat lower than we imagine our own class to be. There appears to be no hope of finding a solution as we erect barriers against those with whom we disagree. And it probably does no good to plead for courtesy from the other side; it is hard enough for our own side to find that constantly shifting line balancing reason with courtesy.