Complexity proves creation
Genesis is easier to believe than evolution theory

I've been a Christian all my life, so maybe that makes me a little biased about the issue, no matter how objective I try to be. When pondering the question of my existence, I still find that a creationist point of view is the only one that makes any sense to me.

I can understand Genesis 1:1 which states, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth,” a little easier than “In the beginning, a big cosmic explosion threw a mass disarray of unorganized matter throughout the universe, causing collisions that formed the Earth and eight other planets.”

Coincidentally, all nine planets have different atmospheres. Some have moons. Others have rings around them. All but one is too hot, too cold or too unbearable for human life, and all revolve around one star out of the billions formed in the explosion.

According to the assumption you have to believe in to support the theory of evolution, somehow an intelligent, non-created piece of matter knew that one of these planets needed to form life-producing soil, plants and trees and produce oxygen, oceans, birds, land animals, sea creatures, and all the organic components. All this so that billions of years later, it could produce intricate and intelligent beings who travel through space, fly on airplanes, and communicate around the globe with cell phones and e-mail.

I think it takes a lot more faith to believe in evolution than to believe that God simply created man in his own image with the intelligence to invent and utilize anything that he puts his mind to.

Pose these questions to yourself: If an explosion in the universe created us, who then created the universe? Or, who created the matter involved in the explosion?

If God does not exist, are we accountable to the universe? Should we worship nature and follow its commandments?

If it had any, maybe we could.

The truth is, laws are either ordained by God or by man. And, if there is no God, who is man to decide whether murder, stealing, rape, incest or anything else is wrong? Man without God would have no morals. The only way we can have accountability is if there is a God.

The theory of evolution only proves one thing — when man becomes so presumptuous that he believes he can no longer believe in God, he has become foolish.

John Sargent is a freshman computer science major from Fort Worth.
He can be reached at (j.w.sargent@student.tcu.edu).

Anne McEowen walked comfortably through the aisles of the sanctuary at Wedgwood Baptist Church on Thursday afternoon, as if the unimaginable hadn’t actually happened there.

McEowen, the church’s librarian and a 24-year member, casually pointed to spots where bullet holes used to be, where a pipe bomb exploded and the pew where Larry Gene Ashbrook’s body lay after he turned the handgun on himself — minutes after killing seven people at an area-wide youth rally.

One year later, the sanctuary is once again serving its original purpose and the almost 2,000 church members are forging ahead, trying to erase memories of the crazed Ashbrook ambling through the aisles, gun in hand, yet embracing how the incident has drawn them closer together.

Church membership has increased, cosmetic changes to the sanctuary have been completed and, as the church deals with the ongoing media crush on the eve of the massacre’s one-year anniversary, a stark reminder of the past has resurfaced.

While rearranging equipment in the sanctuary this week, church members found bullets from Ashbrook’s gun still lodged in the altar’s stage.

Rather than dwell on the carnage’s ghastly aftermath, an unbreakable optimism has managed to prevail at the church.

“Although of course we wish it hadn’t happened, we think a lot of good has come from it,” McEowen said. “These days nobody wants to miss a service.”

What Ashbrook couldn’t kill, the church has used to become stronger than ever before. Rather than run from the haunting images of the gunman pacing through the sanctuary, church members have instead redoubled their faith.

“This is our home,” McEowen said. “Nothing will make us leave.”

Nor should they have to.

So the MTV Music Awards came and went last Thursday, came again on Saturday and Sunday and will probably run again until the end of time, knowing the programmers at MTV.

There was nothing life-altering or earth-shattering to report from the event. Some guy, claiming his half-second of fame, ran onto the stage. Rapper Eminem continued his mindless, over-hyped, narcissistic ramblings. Christina Aguilera tried to out-sing Britney Spears and wound up sounding like she hurt her throat in the process. And tons of stars, including the usually exquisite Jennifer Lopez, showed up wearing outfits whose seams screamed as loud as the audience.

During the ceremony, I waited patiently to see Spears’ much-anticipated performance. After watching the performance, I waited for the press to have its field day.

USA Today ran a photograph of Spears’ outfit, calling her performance and choice of clothing “controversial.” Fox 4 News conducted random interviews with parents on the street who expressed their concern over her clothing, or lack thereof, and who vowed they would not be watching the broadcast with their children — as if anything on MTV comes anywhere near the realm of appropriate family entertainment.
Even the women I work with expressed their distaste for Spears’ choice of attire, although most of their disdain centered on the tackiness, rather than the invisibility.

For those of you who didn’t see the broadcast, Britney Spears performed, or rather lip-synched, and attempted to dance to her teeny-bopper hit “Oops! ... I Did It Again.”

But the interesting thing about the performance wasn’t her rendition of the Rolling Stones hit “Satisfaction,” nor was it the comically oversized pinstripe suit she wore. What interested USA Today, Fox 4 News and the women at work was what Spears wore under the suit.

Did I mention that she stripped off the suit at the beginning of her performance to reveal a two-piece sheer body stocking of sorts with sequins strategically placed to look like a bra and underwear?

Before God, her mother, the television-viewing audience and all those screaming fans, Spears gyrated and writhed her semi-naked body on stage to the tune of a rather annoying song. How dare she?

But wait. Is this really such a bad thing? Spears is, after all, an 18-year-old woman. She didn’t actually copulate on stage and the performance, except for when she stood still on a rotating platform, wasn’t the worst of the show. In fact, I would venture to say that Spears isn’t the sex-obsessed vixen out to corrupt the nation’s youth. And if she is, why is that such a bad thing?

A lot can be learned from Spears, aside from how to make millions despite having no actual singing ability. What the “controversy” around Spears reminds us is that in our society women are still expected to be a certain way, to stay in certain roles.

No one says anything when stars like Mark Wahlberg expose their bulges for Calvin Klein underwear ads. Nor does anyone raise an eyebrow when Flea performs naked on stage with only a guitar to hide the family jewels, or even when Blink-182 donned their birthday suits — all in the name of entertainment.

It is only when a woman becomes comfortable enough to express her semi-nakedness and sexuality that this suddenly becomes a big deal?

Parents express outrage and wonder what is Spears’ problem. What they should do, instead, is praise her for showing young girls the beauty of their bodies and the greatness of capitalism.

Capitalism, you ask?

Well, here is a girl who has very little talent. She can’t even sing live. Yet, she is financially secure. How is this possible? Spears has found something she can market (her sexuality), and before her resources (her body) begin to deplete (becomes old and not so appealing), she’s going to cash in as often as possible.

Isn’t that what this country is all about?

Britney Spears is not this bad, bad girl society and the media try to paint her as being. Sure, she’s talent-less. Sure her voice doesn’t stand up next to Aguilera’s. And yes, you can’t tell her from Jessica Simpson or Mandy Moore. And even though she won’t be around in five years, she’s raking in the money and the fans right now.

And isn’t that what entertainment is all about?

SheriAnn R. Spicer is a senior radio-TV-film major from Fort Worth.
She can be reached at (sheriannrspicer@yahoo.com).