For Darwinists, religion must give way to a new science-based cosmic myth with the power to bind humans together in a new world order. She then asked what this means for morality and argued that people were right to be concerned that all the above would undercut morality. Pearcey went on to explain that the US legal system is based on moral principles and that the only way to have ultimate moral grounding for law is to have an unjudged judge, an uncreated creator. Nothing else can take his place. She pointed to arguments made by Michael Sandel of Harvard in his book Democracy's Discontent in which modern society is portrayed as a struggle between those who think morality is up for grabs and those who view it as given.
Every culture has a creation story jealously guarded by a priesthood.
According to Johnson, the Darwinian creation story finds its essential support in certain philosophical rules, the main one being that natural selection has enormous creative power from bacteria to redwood trees to people. He argued that it has never been seen to create anything. Johnson argued that the scientific priesthood has banished god from allowable discussion, leaving Darwinism as the only game in town. Intelligent design cannot be considered because it includes an unevolved intelligence. For the scientists, it is an offensive thought crime to suggest something other than Darwinism.