I thought you might want to see just what has top officials at the United Methodist Church running scared. Above is a photo of the dreaded Discovery Institute information table from which the UMC hierarchy felt bound to protect attendees at the upcoming General Conference. There you see our colleague Donald McLaughlin, a United Methodist himself, manning the table at a recent event and chatting with passerby as they wait to have a book signed by Stephen Meyer.
From a different angle:
And here for a double threat is Dr. Meyer signing a copy of Darwin’s Doubt. This is the book table as distinct from the information table:
What’s so scary? World Magazine’s Dick Peterson reports that the United Methodist Church refused to respond to a request for an explanation. Of course we know what they’ve said already, and none of it makes much sense. However, World quotes Discovery Institute’s John West and Michael Flannery, another United Methodist.
“It seems to me that you are applying your vetting standard simply to exclude an idea you apparently dislike, not to fairly apply the standards you espouse,” John West, Discovery Institute’s vice president, wrote in a letter to the UMC.
West notes the irony that a denomination with the slogan “Open Hearts, Open Minds, Open Doors” would reject Discovery’s application solely on the basis that it supports intelligent design. The denomination’s slogan should be “Closed Hearts, Closed Minds, Closed Doors,” he said.
“Preventing United Methodist leaders from even hearing about intelligent design isn’t open-minded. It’s intolerant and exclusionary,” West said.
Michael Flannery, a university professor and Discovery Institute fellow, said he was “disheartened and appalled” that officials representing his denomination would try to stop discussion before it starts.
“[They] certainly don’t speak for me or for many other United Methodists in the pews,” Flannery said.
Why do we care? First, because we’re interested in reaching thoughtful adults of all faiths or none. Perhaps more importantly because censorship begets more censorship. Allowed to stand, one seemingly small attempt to silence discussion on a vital issue is an encouragement to other censors.
On the flipside, free speech and critical thought are an incitement to more free speech and more critical thought. That, I think, is the threat posed by our humble information table.