- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
What is the Darwinian argument for the persistence of secular, liberal genes? The same argument as the one for the persistence of "gay genes" and even (if you understand the necessary cellular biology) Tay-Sachs and Sickle Cell Anemia: those genes ultimately help society. Though we are all of us descended from boneheaded reactionaries (I can trace my lineage to the famous 17th Century witch burner, Gov. Bradford of Mass.), liberal, subversive, creative, secular, and unreproductive genes persist because they strengthen society. Without hair dressers, inventors, artists, rock musicians, "terrorists," scoundrels, pot smokers, and crazy scientists, we'd still be banging each other on the heads with clubs. We'd still be "voting" (as much as cave men can be said to do so) for Bush-equivalents (of which there would be many), but there would be no fertility drugs and antibiotics to keep our litters of squalling would-be red staters alive.
