Think Progress » O’Donnell On Creationism: ‘Too Many People Are Blindly Accepting Evolution As Fact’
The Tea Party’s victorious upstart Christine O’Donnell has paraded some “biblical” viewpoints in her pursuit of public office, equating a lack of school prayer with weekly school shootings and masturbation with adultery.
“Well, creationism, in essence, is believing that the world began as the Bible in Genesis says, that God created the Earth in six days, six 24-hour periods. And there is just as much, if not more, evidence supporting that [as there is for evolution].”
Think Progress » O’Donnell On Creationism: ‘Too Many People Are Blindly Accepting Evolution As Fact’
Really? Evidence?
Going by your headline, you think then that religious beliefs different from your own disqualify a person from high public office?
;-)
No, not at all. In fact, I doubt there are
435537 people who think as I do about religion. However, I want *thinkers* in government. Can you be a thinking Bible literalist? I’ll try to stay agnostic on that question. However, to say there is “as much or more” evidence supporting Genesis as there is supporting evolution is, in a word, stupid. I don’t want stupid people running the government. Do you?No, I do not want stupid or ignorant people holding political power. And I agree, a literalist interpretation of the Bible is, first of all, impossible because it has so many internal disagreements, but also shows a certain predisposition to accept illogical things as a matter of faith.
And there is the rub. I do not want to see faith become any more of a consideration in politics than it already is. From either side.
So, it seems to me, it is better to criticize a candidate on the basis of past legislative votes if they have a record, or public policy positions if they do not. Faith-based pronouncements, however based in ignorance, are not the real issue.
IMHO
You have two candidates before you, neither of whom has any record. One is ignorant, if not stupid, by whatever standard/measure you consider fair. One is not. Otherwise, there is no discernible difference. “Not the real issue”? // Ken, of all people, knows bloggers aren’t journalists. Unlike Glen Beck, Lush Limbag, and countless others among the Radical Wrong, I don’t hold myself out as an authority on anything, and my opinions are pretty obvious and probably harmless. (I’m not intentionally inciting anyone to violence.) Of course, the wrapper and comments are my opinion, but it is a fact that O’Donnell thinks creationism is more plausible than evolution. If it matters more to someone that she has no past legislative votes, fine. As for her public policy positions, I don’t know them — I don’t watch Fox News.