Expelled - Movie Review

Ok. So Ben Stein made a movie called Expelled, chronicling the censure of Intelligent Design folks in academia. Since the premise seemed interesting and it's a subject often discussed by religious folks, I decided to check it out. After watching it, I have a few points for anyone interested in my opinion...

To start, there are some rather good things said in the film.

• First, Stein points out that Darwinism is a necessary intellectual justification for the Holocaust and Eugenics, though it is not a sufficient condition. I think that's a correct statement. Only if you think that survival of the fittest and seeking the genetic uber-man are appropriate paradigms for humanity could you believe in the appropriateness of the Holocaust and/or Eugenics.
  
• Second, Stein points out the link between eugenicist Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Barrenhood, and the Nazis. Good. That needs to be said more often.
  
• Third, I think Stein's undertaking is a good one - it shouldn't be the case that folks are written off in academia simply by uttering the words 'intelligent design', and I sincerely believe this to be the case presently. Some critics have called this a conspiracy theory, but listening to the monotonously consistent invocation of the scare-word "Creationism" any time ID is brought up seems to lend more credibility to Stein than the critics.
  
• Fourth, there was a worthwhile foray into the problem of abiogenesis, for which there isn't even a scientific "best guess" ("It just happened, ok?!?"). The extreme implausibility of inanimate stuff *suddenly* deciding to become "animate" and then *suddenly* deciding to replicate is...well...something which isn't dealt with terribly often. There are a few attempts at proposed answers, but none of them are widely accepted and they each seem to have some serious deficiencies.
  

Now...there are also some rather bad things about the film.

• First, it intentionally has the look and feel of a propaganda piece. The use of vintage film clips is, IMHO, excessive. It's meant to ridicule the opposition by linking them with antiquated ideologies. While this can be helpful and I understand why they did it, the particular implementation comes off as rather ham-handed.
  
• Second, there's a notable failure to do the following EXTREMELY CRITICAL things: (1) define intelligent design - what is it? - and (2) give some of the problems ID advocates see with evolution as classically presented. No mention of the Cambrian Explosion, no discussion of the lack of the number of transition fossils one might hope for / expect to see, no discussion of irreducible complexity -- these are very engaging questions, and scientists offer some explanations (sometimes contradictory, sometimes utterly inadequate, sometimes rather fulfilling), but the simple fact that none of these subjects are even broached in the film strikes me as a marked deficiency. The closest you get is the rather facile claim that when darwinists talk amongst themselves they acknowledge some problems with the theory. That's waaaaay too vague, if you ask me.
  
• Third, the Eugenics / Abortion segment was entirely too short and also failed to engage Euthanasia, which is the final solution (to use the term) for the weakest members of our society. No mention of the disproportionate number of black abortions, no mention of the >90% of Downs Syndrome diagnosed babies being aborted, no mention of the impending "duty to die" that looms like a thunderstorm on the horizon for our nation's elderly should "assisted suicide" come to be the law of the land... I could go on and on about the culture of death and the diminished status of the inherent dignity of all humans. In brief, I think the film's treatment was way too short given the dangers these currently pose.
• Fourth, I think the "Darwinism leads to atheism" argument is (1) fallacious and (2) tactically bad. First, the necessity runs the opposite direction -> atheism requires that the believer be closed minded to anything except Darwinism, though there are many theistic believers in evolution. Second, this is a scare tactic. Teach your kids Darwinism and they'll have no choice but to become atheists. While this might seem logical to Richard Dawkins, it's absolutely not the case and to make the claim is to rely on an appeal to fear.
• Fifth, because of the numerous deficiencies, I doubt the film is likely to persuade anyone. I highly doubt anyone will change their opinion of pretty much anything as a result of the film. And that's a shame, because it could have been otherwise. But...perhaps it will get people talking?
  

I have plenty more I could say, but that's more or less the gist of my thoughts. As for my own belief (if anyone cares), I'm rather agnostic about origins theories. I whole-heartedly believe what the Church requires, but outside of that I'll simply go where the evidence leads. God (and we, His people) has nothing to fear from Truth - indeed, Truth is how we come to know God, for God is Truth. To whatever extent evolution (or ID, for that matter) can be shown to be true, I'll willingly believe. The trick lays in identifying what has been "shown"...