View the Trailer

The Utopian Left and Its ‘War on Science’

email Email

Increasingly desperate Democrats, facing the prospect of a conservative tidal wave in November, depend on a few hackneyed lines of attack in their last ditch efforts to demonize resurgent Republicans. The libs love to characterize their rivals as woman-hating theocrats, greedy exploiters and, most outrageously, as ignorant extremists who wage a “war on science” on behalf of partisan superstition.

This last characterization counts as especially obnoxious since it’s the liberals far more than right-wingers who insistently ignore the scientific evidence on some of the cutting edge issues they care about most. They accuse Republicans of anti-science bias for maintaining open minds about challenges to climate change and Darwinian orthodoxy. But questions on the ultimate impact of global warming, or presence–or absence–of intelligent design in the universe, count as speculative or predictive–not quickly settled by empirical evidence. The left, on the other-hand, eagerly embraces laughably unscientific views on gender and sexuality, despite an abundance of well-researched and readily available information to contradict their convictions.

Consider, for example, the politically correct contention that differences in professional and personal priorities between men and women stem directly from unjust, restrictive cultural norms. According to this worldview, if women have been under-represented as truck-drivers and CEO’s, and over-represented as nurses and preschool teachers, then that reflects some profound failure in our social arrangements. Left-leaning activists refuse to rest until women are just as likely as men to serve as front-line combat Marines, and men are just as likely as women to prioritize family time over the pursuit of corporate promotions.

Obviously, these beliefs represent a total rejection not only of our ordinary experience of relationships and reality, but a denial of a crushing weight of scientific evidence. For more than twenty years, best-selling books like BRAIN SEX and MEN ARE FROM MARS, WOMEN ARE FROM VENUS have presented conclusive research that males and females differ not only in musculature but in the congenital hard-wiring of their minds. The refusal to force males and females to compete against one another in Olympic athletic events indicates that, on issues that matter most to society (like sports), we still recognize the force of unbridgeable gender distinctions. But in most other undertakings the refusal to acknowledge and accommodate those differences constitutes a foolish, flat-earth insistence on ignoring science.

Meanwhile, the same sophisticates who won’t accept the innate, immutable differences between male and female insist on magnifying the far more malleable and unimportant distinctions between gay and straight. The cognoscenti won’t tolerate the slightest doubt that homosexuality is an inborn characteristic with no more element of choice than eye-color or shoe size. This contention contradicts the multitude of studies in every corner of the globe that show only a minority of those individuals who experience same-sex encounters before age 21 grow up to identify themselves as adult homosexuals; nearly two-thirds who report such adolescent experimentation identify themselves as “exclusively heterosexual.” In fact, all recent figures suggest that self-described “bisexuals” in the United States are more numerous than either gays or lesbians, and with inclinations for partners of both genders these bisexuals certainly enjoy some element of choice in the way they arrange their intimate associations.

Illogically enough, at the same time the left denies any chance for choice or change regarding the way we express our lust or longing, the academic and entertainment elites enthusiastically affirm the idea that we are utterly free to select our gender. Never mind the incontrovertible scientific fact that no one has ever found a clear-cut, physiological factor that mandates homosexual orientation, while every cell of our bodies, not to mention our factory-installed plumbing, comes clearly stamped with DNA as either male or female. The liberal romance with trendy trans-sexuality also leads to the denial of abundant evidence that expensive and inevitably mutilating “gender reassignment surgery” produces no medically provable benefits.

Britain’s left-wing (but respected) Guardian newspaper commissioned a study as long ago as 2004 in response to numerous individuals who had contacted the publication expressing regret over “changing their sex.” In researching the matter, the University of Birmingham reviewed more than “100 international medical studies of post-operative transsexuals” and “found no robust scientific evidence that gender reassignment surgery is clinically effective.”

Their additional survey of data from the United Kingdom’s National Health Service found an attempted suicide rate of “up to 18% noted in some medical studies of gender reassignment.” The Guardian also cited research from the United States and Holland showing that up to one fifth of patients expressed “regret for changing sex.” None of these reports have served in any way to slow the mad rush of a stubbornly unscientific establishment to provide lavish public and institutional funding for these disfiguring surgeries of deeply dubious utility.

Which ideological orientation, then, demonstrates a more cavalier dismissal of empirical, scientific principles: the utopian, reshape-the-universe left or the pragmatic, religion-respecting right?

Yes, conservatives may frequently question materialist suppositions on ultimately unknowable questions about the development of intelligent life and the origins of the cosmos, or the future of climate change on planet earth. But on more intimate, immediate issues concerning our most private and fundamental realities, it’s the left and not the right that recklessly ignores the evidence of science and common sense.

This column originally appeared at on March 20, 2014. 


email Email

Comments (14)

Leave a comment
  1. Robert Berger  •  Mar 28, 2014 at 6:25 pm

    The left is “waging a war on science ?” This claim is beyond ludicrous . It’s the RIGHT which is doingthis. The GOP is filled with ignorant jerks who actiually believe in creationism ,a 6,000
    old earth , Adam & Eve,a talking snake,Noah & his ark and all that hooey , and Michael
    Medved says the left is waging a war on science ?
    This is like saying that Hitler and Germany were threatened byev ilJews and the Nazis
    fought a just war against them . The mind boggles .
    The right is filled with idiots who are determined to teach kids in school that dinosaurs & humans existed atthe same time and that Noahj was actually ablew to gather two of every animal species on an ark , etc .
    Medved , you’ve really lost it , or are just selling out the corrupt and evil GOP .

    • BigZ  •  Mar 28, 2014 at 6:50 pm

      I find it interesting that discussions of these questions by Democrats all refuse to discuss science. Just a repetition of the same tired old Ad Hominem attacks. Why don’t you act like evolution is true, and quit hindering the elimination of the unfit who can’t make their way in this world. (I believe this is a monstrous idea, but fully reasonable given the outlook expressed in your letter). I don’t believe for a minute you believe in acting like evolution is true, but funny how you mock those who have a reason to care for the unfit.

      • BigZ  •  Mar 28, 2014 at 6:56 pm

        and care for the unfit with their own money.

    • BigZ  •  Mar 28, 2014 at 7:07 pm

      and read Hitler, When I started reading him, I was shocked to find he was intelligent, extremely literate and Hitler firmly believed he was on the side of evolution and was just following the best science of his day in eliminating the unfit (Such as Jews). Needless to say I reject Hitler, but you have very little scientific standing to do so. You agree with the basic tenants of Hitler’s Social thought such as gun control and Socialized Medicine. I reject Hitlers thought, yet I’m the Nazi? Come on, please stop and think.

    • GROG  •  Mar 29, 2014 at 8:01 am

      Did you even bother to read the article?

      • Andrew  •  Mar 29, 2014 at 1:06 pm

        Haha, he can’t even form a readable response.

  2. Reb Bacchus  •  Mar 28, 2014 at 9:18 pm

    It is amazing how liberals always lump “creation science” with intelligent design. Unless God chooses to make himself known, intelligent design can either be proved nor disapproved. Frankly, to accept Darwinian evolution requires huge leaps of faith! To imagine all of the events to have happened randomly requires odds that are truly astronomical.

    It’s like the atheist accusing people of faith of being the cause of religious wars. Ignoring for the time being that most religious wars have other basis for their existence, atheists have killed more people than all the religious wars in history combined.

    • Laurence Needleman  •  Mar 30, 2014 at 6:47 am


  3. afraid of hollywoods army  •  Mar 29, 2014 at 6:44 pm

    We can only pray for Robert. There is hope for him. He’ll eventually stumble on why he can exist therefore so can God. Anyone who has the basic understanding of time understands it is not static. The experiment of light being warped through a planets gravity tells a thinking person what may be a nano second here may be a lifetime or 6000 years somewhere else. Also, quantum entanglement where atomic particles no matter how far apart exceed the speed of light w/the furthest point away in the universe being right next to us. Robert please open your mind and discard what your masters have taught you. Open your mind and respect those who come to God by faith alone. Your path may be entirely different but you will see someday how wrong you are. Hopefully in your first existence since its the proof a second may be possible. How ironic if its with dinosaurs.

  4. Big Daddy Don  •  Mar 31, 2014 at 3:16 am

    Great article very well thought out.

  5. Brian  •  Apr 1, 2014 at 9:21 am

    Science is not about “keeping an open mind”.
    Science is not about opinion.
    Science is about facts derived from a disciplined adherence to a set of proven principles. When the political right asks people to “keep an open mind” what they are really asking is that people reject science and substitute their own subjective bias. Once you accept the notion that any viewpoint is valid then you leave the realm of science and enter the world of politics and popularity contest. Science works because the scientific method works. Want proof? You have a working computer.

    • Daniel  •  Apr 1, 2014 at 10:45 am

      When the political left talks about “consensus science” this is PolySci, not Physics. “Consensus science” is a political term, ergo AGW is about politics, not demonstrated fact. After ‘global warming’ lost steam (pun intended), they turned to focus groups and came up with ‘climate change’. So ANY change is now ‘man-made’ because politics deems it so.

      “Settled science” is another left-wing political term, this is the end of science? Only a “Progressive” hack could believe this. The climate does change, but nowhere is it written in stone

      • Brian  •  Apr 1, 2014 at 1:37 pm

        Actually, the scientific community was well satisfied with the simple word science. “Consensus” and “settled” are adjectives that were added in response to comments from the less-informed and otherwise politically motivated. Temperature rises (global warming) causes changes in the overall pattern and trends in weather (climate change). The facts have been demonstrated.

  6. afraid of hollywoods army  •  Apr 1, 2014 at 5:47 pm

    Its true. After what has become of science in the GW debate, no clearer case can be made for malpractice. If you don’t know this you’re either in denial, living under a rock or financially vested. If you need another example of how the tax collectors have deceived, you are now paying for rich peoples healthcare with the red Chinese being the eventual debt collectors. Good luck with that.

Tell Us What You Think

All fields required. The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this website you agree to accept our Terms of Use.

Medhead - Michael Medved's Premium Content

Login Join
Advertise with us Advertisement

Follow Michael

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Get Medved weekly movie reviews, columns, and special offers delivered to your inbox.


The Michael Medved Show - Mobile App

Download from App Store Get it on Google play
Michael Medved's History Store Also available on TuneIn