The television show “Glee” (a show I’ve never seen) is going to deal with bullying later this season. I suspect that bullying has been going on for a long time. The strong often prey on the weak for any number of reasons. Bullies are cowards. They are middle management. Those at the top of the social pecking order hardly ever bully. They don’t need to. Those in the middle bully to claim what’s left of the territory held by those at the top. They can’t succeed by hard work, intelligence, or social status, so they bully to artificially raise their standing. By pushing the weak down, they falsely elevate themselves. Bullies rarely stop. They go through life denigrating everybody they meet. It’s the only way they can feel important and superior. The Bible describes this as “lording it over” (Matt. 20:25) rather than acting as servants (vv. 26-28).

The demands of Christian worldview require that bullying be rejected. Christians should be protectors and guardians no matter who is being bullied. For some young people, bullying is a way of life. I was never bullied, so it is difficult for me to comprehend going to school every day in fear of some thug or group of thugs who might stuff me in a locker or worse. The only time I saw bullying take place was on a school bus. My good friend JB was being pushed around by an upperclassman. I intervened because I could. (Being able to bench press 350 pounds as a 16-year old may have had something to do with it.) The expression of thanks on JB’s face is still with me. I wasn’t the only one who stood between the bully and the bullied. It didn’t take long for the bullies to get the message that there were fellow-students who would not tolerate weaker kids being pushed around.

The moral climate today is different from the way it was 40 years ago. Bullying could not be justified then since the remnants of a Christian worldview were still operating. Given what we know about what public school children are being taught today, bullying is natural. The strong can and should bully the weak. The survival of the fittest is a biological and scientific fact justified by the major tenets of evolution. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, the Columbine shooters, justified their actions based on Natural Selection (see here). In fact, Harris was wearing “a white T-shirt with the inscription ‘Natural Selection’ on its front.” It was based on a video game of the same name. “The game’s World Wide Web site says it encompasses a ‘realm where anything can happen,’ a place for the ‘bravest of the brave and the fiercest of the fierce. . . . It’s a place where survival of the fittest takes a very literal meaning. . . .  It’s the natural way, it’s Natural Selection.” ((Kevin Vaughan, “Judge Unseals Autopsy Report on Eric Harris,” Denver Rocky Mountain News (June 25, 1999).))

The Columbine incident was not the only case where bullying was carried out to its logical extreme by those who have imbibed at the sacred waters of evolution. “At least seven people were killed when a teenaged gunman opened fire at a school in southern Finland on November 7, 2007 hours after a video was posted on YouTube predicting a massacre there. The gunman was a pupil at Jokela High School, a teacher who witnessed the attack told Reuters, and had walked through the school firing into classroom after classroom. . . . The YouTube video, entitled ‘Jokela High School Massacre—11/7/2007,’ was posted by a user called ‘Sturmgeist89.’ ‘I am prepared to fight and die for my cause,’ read a posting by a user of the same name. ‘I, as a natural selector, will eliminate all who I see unfit, disgraces of human race and failures of natural selection.’ Sturmgeist means storm spirit in German.” ((“Seven killed at Finland school after YouTube post,” Reuters (November 7, 2007): An almost identical article by “Sky News” does not include the “natural selector” and “natural selection” comments.)) The shooter described himself as “a social Darwinist.” ((David Williams, “Eight shot dead including principal in school massacre predicted in YouTube video,” Daily Mail online (November 7, 2007).))

The homosexual anti-bullying crowd has appealed to the animal world to justify their sexual behavior. For example, And Tango Makes Three ((Cristina Cardoze, “They’re in love. They’re gay. They’re penguins…. And they’re not alone” (June 6, 2006).)) is an illustrated children’s book about two male penguins that raise a baby penguin. Supposedly this penguin pair is spot-on evidence that homosexuality is “natural.” But animals are notorious bullies. The weak most often do not survive. They are attacked and eaten by predators and even their own species act cruelly to the weakest members. (see here). In the end, there is no justification for anti-bullying in the world of evolutionary dominance. Kids are doing what they are being taught is natural. Anti-bullying campaigns are schizophrenic. They are generally anti-Christian, and yet they need Christian values to justify anti-bullying.

I’m not the only one who has seen a link between teaching evolution and bullying. An article appeared in USA TODAY in 1993 that makes a similar case. It was written by Barbara Reynolds and is titled “If Your Kids Go Ape in School, You’ll Know Why.” ((This article originally appeared in USA TODAY (August 27, 1993), 11A.))

Don’t be surprised if our little darlings go ape or get up to monkeyshines when they return to class.

Misbehavior tops the list of what parents and teachers worry about.

And that’s exactly where such concerns belong, considering what kids are not being taught in school.

In most schools, Johnetta and Johnny are being taught evolution, that humankind evolved from apes. ((Actually, evolutionists teach that humans and apes evolved from a distant common ancestor.))

The issue came to the forefront recently because a school district near San Diego had the good sense to adopt a policy of teaching creationism -much to the dismay of critics, including USA TODAY’s editorial page.

It is amazing that media institutions that virtually worship the First Amendment are the first to toss it when it comes to religious free speech. When both creationism and evolution are taught side by side, you don’t have the establishment of a religion, which the Constitution prohibits, but an opportunity to be protected from one-sided, narrow thinking, which the Constitution encourages.

Prohibiting the teaching of creationism in favor of evolution creates an

atheistic, belligerent tone that might explain why our kids sometimes perform like Godzilla instead of children made in the image of God.

While evolution teaches that we are accidents or freaks of nature, creationism shows humankind as the offspring of a divine Creator. There are rules to follow which govern not only our time on Earth, but also our afterlife.

One philosophy preaches happenstance with mayhem as a conclusion; the other, divine order. One suggests the survival of the fittest; the other, a commitment to serve the weakest and sickest among us. To me, there is no contest. Teaching evolution makes about as much sense as teaching our kids that humankind was grown in a cabbage patch or raised by wolves. Even in the dullest mind, a light bulb should go off: Who created the cabbage, and who made the wolves?

Under the rules of evolution, teachers are forced to answer to King Kong rather than to the King of Kings.

We are not human animals. We have written speech and higher intellect, but more important, we have souls fueled by a spirit of right or wrong.

Human action is determined by core beliefs. Creationism teaches that humans are wonderfully made with the promise of high expectations.

If evolution is forced on our kids, we shouldn’t be perplexed when they beat on their chests or, worse yet, beat on each other and their teachers.