On August 23 2011 02:44 KaZzZz wrote: I just read on different sources that 40% of the Americans believe in creationism. Please tell me i didn't understand something or the figure is biased for any reason. Or it's the most unbelievable and saddest thing i have ever read. I had underestimated so much the percentage.
Since it's 40% of the whole population, i guess it's a vast majority of the Republicans. I don't know how to expresse clearly my felling, but it really scares me. It gives me the impression that there's a black sheep in the West, and it's the leader.
Oh and i'm agnostic, definitely not atheist. Please don't see there an heretic message.
I'm not sure how we are defining creationism, but I don't quite understand why you would be terrified that people believe a God created the world. That has been the common belief of most of the world, not just the US, for most of history.
Ofc by "believe in creationism" i don't mean "believe that there's a god" (or the percentage, i guess, would be way higher than 40% for the US).
I mean "believe the world is 6 thousand years old" (is that a correct sentence ?).
On August 23 2011 02:44 KaZzZz wrote: I just read on different sources that 40% of the Americans believe in creationism. Please tell me i didn't understand something or the figure is biased for any reason. Or it's the most unbelievable and saddest thing i have ever read. I had underestimated so much the percentage.
Since it's 40% of the whole population, i guess it's a vast majority of the Republicans. I don't know how to expresse clearly my felling, but it really scares me. It gives me the impression that there's a black sheep in the West, and it's the leader.
Oh and i'm agnostic, definitely not atheist. Please don't see there an heretic message.
I'm not sure how we are defining creationism, but I don't quite understand why you would be terrified that people believe a God created the world. That has been the common belief of most of the world, not just the US, for most of history.
It all depends on the poll, question wording, etc., but there are plenty of polls where 40% believe not just that God created the world in general, but that evolution is false and God created people as they are now directly. (for example) And yes, it's very common in the world in general, but normally that percentage goes a lot lower once the country becomes wealthy and well-educated. It should be a little scary.
My personal experience would indicate that a large fraction of that 40% gives more nuanced answers if you ask them in a less formal way - comments about how you can't really know, etc. Then again, I don't live in the south.
On August 23 2011 02:44 KaZzZz wrote: I just read on different sources that 40% of the Americans believe in creationism. Please tell me i didn't understand something or the figure is biased for any reason. Or it's the most unbelievable and saddest thing i have ever read. I had underestimated so much the percentage.
Since it's 40% of the whole population, i guess it's a vast majority of the Republicans. I don't know how to expresse clearly my felling, but it really scares me. It gives me the impression that there's a black sheep in the West, and it's the leader.
Oh and i'm agnostic, definitely not atheist. Please don't see there an heretic message.
I'm not sure how we are defining creationism, but I don't quite understand why you would be terrified that people believe a God created the world. That has been the common belief of most of the world, not just the US, for most of history.
Ofc by "believe in creationism" i don't mean "believe that there's a god" (or the percentage, i guess, would be way higher than 40% for the US).
I mean "believe the world is 6 thousand years old" (is that a correct sentence ?).
That sentence is fine.
I agree that it's scary that so many people truly believe the world is only 6,000 years old. I think it's because it is evidence that despite mountains of empirical evidence, these people will believe whatever they want to believe and not be open to any other possibilities. These people should be seeing that it's clear that the world is well over 6,000 years old, and adapting their beliefs in god around what can be considered more or less fact.
On August 23 2011 02:44 KaZzZz wrote: I just read on different sources that 40% of the Americans believe in creationism. Please tell me i didn't understand something or the figure is biased for any reason. Or it's the most unbelievable and saddest thing i have ever read. I had underestimated so much the percentage.
Since it's 40% of the whole population, i guess it's a vast majority of the Republicans. I don't know how to expresse clearly my felling, but it really scares me. It gives me the impression that there's a black sheep in the West, and it's the leader.
Oh and i'm agnostic, definitely not atheist. Please don't see there an heretic message.
I'm not sure how we are defining creationism, but I don't quite understand why you would be terrified that people believe a God created the world. That has been the common belief of most of the world, not just the US, for most of history.
Ofc by "believe in creationism" i don't mean "believe that there's a god" (or the percentage, i guess, would be way higher than 40% for the US).
I mean "believe the world is 6 thousand years old" (is that a correct sentence ?).
Believing the world is 6000 years old is usually called "young earth creationism," and the percentage who believe that is definitely substantially lower than 40%. (It's still way higher than it should be, though.)
On August 23 2011 02:44 KaZzZz wrote: I just read on different sources that 40% of the Americans believe in creationism. Please tell me i didn't understand something or the figure is biased for any reason. Or it's the most unbelievable and saddest thing i have ever read. I had underestimated so much the percentage.
Since it's 40% of the whole population, i guess it's a vast majority of the Republicans. I don't know how to expresse clearly my felling, but it really scares me. It gives me the impression that there's a black sheep in the West, and it's the leader.
Oh and i'm agnostic, definitely not atheist. Please don't see there an heretic message.
I'm not sure how we are defining creationism, but I don't quite understand why you would be terrified that people believe a God created the world. That has been the common belief of most of the world, not just the US, for most of history.
Ofc by "believe in creationism" i don't mean "believe that there's a god" (or the percentage, i guess, would be way higher than 40% for the US).
I mean "believe the world is 6 thousand years old" (is that a correct sentence ?).
If that's our definition, then no, clearly 40% of Americans do not believe that the Earth is 6000 years old. And 63% of statistics are bullshit anyway...
On August 22 2011 04:51 TOloseGT wrote: The more I look at Huntsman, the more I like him. Too bad the Republican base can't see that.
He believes in evolution. How could the Republican party possibly nominate him?
That is the #1 issue among TL users apparently, whether or not the candidate believes in evolution.
Who gives a damn their stance on the economy, foreign policy, immigration... I just want my candidate to be likable, and relatable!
I think you miss the point.
No, clearly you are the one missing the point here. I've just read through 3 pages of people discussing politicians personal religious beliefs instead of the issues that are actually important. Those who say that their personal beliefs matter regarding how they will govern are using the same logic as Republican Christians who want their candidate to share their religious values.
Here's how I look ak the issue:
Do you believe in ending the wars in the middle east? Do you believe we should cut spending to reduce our deficit, beginning with military expenditures? Do you believe we should reverse the trend set by the "war on drugs"? Do you believe we should be doing more to prevent people from illegally entering the country? Do you believe in reducing the power and influence of the federal reserve?
If your answer is yes to these issues, then you should be supporting Ron Paul, regardless of his personal beliefs on religion or anything else. Despite people labeling him as nuts, he has amazingly sane policies. You hopefully have the common sense also to realize that when a libertarian advocates eliminating government functions or departments, they are speaking towards an ideal. Obviously Ron Paul wouldn't be able to eliminate the federal reserve or the income tax, and he doesn't think it's possible either. The idea is we should be working towards that ideal, instead of the opposite direction.
This is where you ignore all of these issues and disregard everything I said with "but he believes in X so he must be insane."
On August 23 2011 03:03 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Sadly this pretty much seals his fate of not getting the nomination, not that he had a chance to start with:
Kinda disappointed.. He seemed like a pretty reasonable guy, and I think it would definitely have been useful to have a president who can speak mandarin.
On August 22 2011 17:39 BlackFlag wrote: People who blatantly refuse to acknowledge at least basic science are idiots. That's why it's important if they believe in evolution. Someone who rejects science because in his 2000 year old book stands something different shouldn't have any responsibility, especially they should not be president of a country.
I don't think that's exactly fair - I have a number of Christian friends who put in a lot of work helping their community either through the church, their jobs, or other charitable work. Unless their acts involve science teaching directly I'm not sure why it matters, they are otherwise upstanding and responsible people.
Obviously I agree when it comes to the presidency of the US but lets not dehumanise people so broadly just because they believe in creationism, ok?
Politics should be based on science, Natural Science and Arts (History and that stuff, I don't really know the common english expression for that type of studies). They can be supernice people I bet, but they shouldn't then work in a field that directly needs science (E.g. Politics).
On a personal level, I don't think I could hang out with people who believe in creationism and the likes. I have religious friends too, none of them believe in that stuff. I think not even the priest of our church believes in creationism. No one does in Europe, and people wouldn't be taken seriously, on no level. They may believe that god kickstarted evolution (or something like that)...
Political science is a scam on the grandest scale. Any science that makes normative statements is blatantly fallacious from the get-go. You cant take something like that seriously.
I disagree. And i wasn't talking bout political science only, but sociology, history etc. too.
On August 22 2011 20:22 RoyW wrote:
On August 22 2011 20:03 Josealtron wrote:
On August 22 2011 18:19 BlackFlag wrote:
On August 22 2011 18:06 Bubble-T wrote:
On August 22 2011 17:39 BlackFlag wrote: People who blatantly refuse to acknowledge at least basic science are idiots. That's why it's important if they believe in evolution. Someone who rejects science because in his 2000 year old book stands something different shouldn't have any responsibility, especially they should not be president of a country.
I don't think that's exactly fair - I have a number of Christian friends who put in a lot of work helping their community either through the church, their jobs, or other charitable work. Unless their acts involve science teaching directly I'm not sure why it matters, they are otherwise upstanding and responsible people.
Obviously I agree when it comes to the presidency of the US but lets not dehumanise people so broadly just because they believe in creationism, ok?
Politics should be based on science, Natural Science and Arts (History and that stuff, I don't really know the common english expression for that type of studies). They can be supernice people I bet, but they shouldn't then work in a field that directly needs science (E.g. Politics).
On a personal level, I don't think I could hang out with people who believe in creationism and the likes. I have religious friends too, none of them believe in that stuff. I think not even the priest of our church believes in creationism. No one does in Europe, and people wouldn't be taken seriously, on no level. They may believe that god kickstarted evolution (or something like that)...
Wait, seriously? I thought many people in Europe(or at least in places like Italy) believe in creationism. I live in the US and have only been to Europe once but is this actually true?
Basically, yes. Even here in Ireland, religious people believe in an Evolution facilitated by god. There are an incredibly small number of people who are creationists in the man was created 4-6 thousand years ago sense. And those are all ridiculed in mainstream culture.
If even the catholic church is more progressive, there's gotta be something wrong with the republican party.
Well, the intellectuals that backed Vatican II were, broadly, rather progressive people. The Catholic Church is still wrought with various deep problems, but if one looks at the modern Catholic church in the context of its entire history, the past century has been a very "progressive" time for the Catholics.
If excommunicating a 9 year old girl, (and her entire family) for getting an abortion after being raped by her step father counts as progressive, then sure, I'll agree.
Ron Paul admits that the new FEMA-related legislation means setting the stage for violence in this country. An interesting development, i wonder how other candidates will echo this?
On August 22 2011 17:39 BlackFlag wrote: People who blatantly refuse to acknowledge at least basic science are idiots. That's why it's important if they believe in evolution. Someone who rejects science because in his 2000 year old book stands something different shouldn't have any responsibility, especially they should not be president of a country.
I don't think that's exactly fair - I have a number of Christian friends who put in a lot of work helping their community either through the church, their jobs, or other charitable work. Unless their acts involve science teaching directly I'm not sure why it matters, they are otherwise upstanding and responsible people.
Obviously I agree when it comes to the presidency of the US but lets not dehumanise people so broadly just because they believe in creationism, ok?
Politics should be based on science, Natural Science and Arts (History and that stuff, I don't really know the common english expression for that type of studies). They can be supernice people I bet, but they shouldn't then work in a field that directly needs science (E.g. Politics).
On a personal level, I don't think I could hang out with people who believe in creationism and the likes. I have religious friends too, none of them believe in that stuff. I think not even the priest of our church believes in creationism. No one does in Europe, and people wouldn't be taken seriously, on no level. They may believe that god kickstarted evolution (or something like that)...
Political science is a scam on the grandest scale. Any science that makes normative statements is blatantly fallacious from the get-go. You cant take something like that seriously.
I disagree. And i wasn't talking bout political science only, but sociology, history etc. too.
On August 22 2011 20:22 RoyW wrote:
On August 22 2011 20:03 Josealtron wrote:
On August 22 2011 18:19 BlackFlag wrote:
On August 22 2011 18:06 Bubble-T wrote:
On August 22 2011 17:39 BlackFlag wrote: People who blatantly refuse to acknowledge at least basic science are idiots. That's why it's important if they believe in evolution. Someone who rejects science because in his 2000 year old book stands something different shouldn't have any responsibility, especially they should not be president of a country.
I don't think that's exactly fair - I have a number of Christian friends who put in a lot of work helping their community either through the church, their jobs, or other charitable work. Unless their acts involve science teaching directly I'm not sure why it matters, they are otherwise upstanding and responsible people.
Obviously I agree when it comes to the presidency of the US but lets not dehumanise people so broadly just because they believe in creationism, ok?
Politics should be based on science, Natural Science and Arts (History and that stuff, I don't really know the common english expression for that type of studies). They can be supernice people I bet, but they shouldn't then work in a field that directly needs science (E.g. Politics).
On a personal level, I don't think I could hang out with people who believe in creationism and the likes. I have religious friends too, none of them believe in that stuff. I think not even the priest of our church believes in creationism. No one does in Europe, and people wouldn't be taken seriously, on no level. They may believe that god kickstarted evolution (or something like that)...
Wait, seriously? I thought many people in Europe(or at least in places like Italy) believe in creationism. I live in the US and have only been to Europe once but is this actually true?
Basically, yes. Even here in Ireland, religious people believe in an Evolution facilitated by god. There are an incredibly small number of people who are creationists in the man was created 4-6 thousand years ago sense. And those are all ridiculed in mainstream culture.
If even the catholic church is more progressive, there's gotta be something wrong with the republican party.
Well, the intellectuals that backed Vatican II were, broadly, rather progressive people. The Catholic Church is still wrought with various deep problems, but if one looks at the modern Catholic church in the context of its entire history, the past century has been a very "progressive" time for the Catholics.
If excommunicating a 9 year old girl, (and her entire family) for getting an abortion after being raped by her step father counts as progressive, then sure, I'll agree.
What part of "within the context of its entire history" are you unable to understand? If we look at how the Catholic church is moving and compare that to the way Fundamentalism has moved in America in the past century, it is obvious that the Catholic church has been extremely progressive with Vatican II whereas Fundamentalism has turned a large part of American Christianity into what is perhaps the most disturbing expression of religion in the West. Ratzinger has been turning the Catholic church backwards from some of the progressive movements Vatican II has accomplished, but even so the Vatican has been more progressive than the Christian Right in America.
Great job on completely missing the context of what I said, and what I replied to.
On August 22 2011 17:39 BlackFlag wrote: People who blatantly refuse to acknowledge at least basic science are idiots. That's why it's important if they believe in evolution. Someone who rejects science because in his 2000 year old book stands something different shouldn't have any responsibility, especially they should not be president of a country.
I don't think that's exactly fair - I have a number of Christian friends who put in a lot of work helping their community either through the church, their jobs, or other charitable work. Unless their acts involve science teaching directly I'm not sure why it matters, they are otherwise upstanding and responsible people.
Obviously I agree when it comes to the presidency of the US but lets not dehumanise people so broadly just because they believe in creationism, ok?
Politics should be based on science, Natural Science and Arts (History and that stuff, I don't really know the common english expression for that type of studies). They can be supernice people I bet, but they shouldn't then work in a field that directly needs science (E.g. Politics).
On a personal level, I don't think I could hang out with people who believe in creationism and the likes. I have religious friends too, none of them believe in that stuff. I think not even the priest of our church believes in creationism. No one does in Europe, and people wouldn't be taken seriously, on no level. They may believe that god kickstarted evolution (or something like that)...
Political science is a scam on the grandest scale. Any science that makes normative statements is blatantly fallacious from the get-go. You cant take something like that seriously.
I disagree. And i wasn't talking bout political science only, but sociology, history etc. too.
On August 22 2011 20:22 RoyW wrote:
On August 22 2011 20:03 Josealtron wrote:
On August 22 2011 18:19 BlackFlag wrote:
On August 22 2011 18:06 Bubble-T wrote:
On August 22 2011 17:39 BlackFlag wrote: People who blatantly refuse to acknowledge at least basic science are idiots. That's why it's important if they believe in evolution. Someone who rejects science because in his 2000 year old book stands something different shouldn't have any responsibility, especially they should not be president of a country.
I don't think that's exactly fair - I have a number of Christian friends who put in a lot of work helping their community either through the church, their jobs, or other charitable work. Unless their acts involve science teaching directly I'm not sure why it matters, they are otherwise upstanding and responsible people.
Obviously I agree when it comes to the presidency of the US but lets not dehumanise people so broadly just because they believe in creationism, ok?
Politics should be based on science, Natural Science and Arts (History and that stuff, I don't really know the common english expression for that type of studies). They can be supernice people I bet, but they shouldn't then work in a field that directly needs science (E.g. Politics).
On a personal level, I don't think I could hang out with people who believe in creationism and the likes. I have religious friends too, none of them believe in that stuff. I think not even the priest of our church believes in creationism. No one does in Europe, and people wouldn't be taken seriously, on no level. They may believe that god kickstarted evolution (or something like that)...
Wait, seriously? I thought many people in Europe(or at least in places like Italy) believe in creationism. I live in the US and have only been to Europe once but is this actually true?
Basically, yes. Even here in Ireland, religious people believe in an Evolution facilitated by god. There are an incredibly small number of people who are creationists in the man was created 4-6 thousand years ago sense. And those are all ridiculed in mainstream culture.
If even the catholic church is more progressive, there's gotta be something wrong with the republican party.
Well, the intellectuals that backed Vatican II were, broadly, rather progressive people. The Catholic Church is still wrought with various deep problems, but if one looks at the modern Catholic church in the context of its entire history, the past century has been a very "progressive" time for the Catholics.
If excommunicating a 9 year old girl, (and her entire family) for getting an abortion after being raped by her step father counts as progressive, then sure, I'll agree.
What part of "within the context of its entire history" are you unable to understand? If we look at how the Catholic church is moving and compare that to the way Fundamentalism has moved in America in the past century, it is obvious that the Catholic church has been extremely progressive with Vatican II whereas Fundamentalism has turned a large part of American Christianity into what is perhaps the most disturbing expression of religion in the West. Ratzinger has been turning the Catholic church backwards from some of the progressive movements Vatican II has accomplished, but even so the Vatican has been more progressive than the Christian Right in America.
Great job on completely missing the context of what I said, and what I replied to.
I get what you're trying to say here, but honestly, if the Vatican gave a shit and really believed that church and science can coexist, they could, would and should do a hell of a lot more to achieve it in this modern scientific age. Their lack of involvement in the world stage is appalling. When you control a flock of people that large, there is no vested interest in just handing over even a fraction of that grip of power away to someone else.
Until then, scientists need to tip-toe around religious issues on the grounds of religious-tolerance and avoid being called a bigot because they found further proof that the world wasn't created in 7 days. Meanwhile, Republicans will continue to maintain a base of anti-science lunatics who will continue to bite at the ankles of the world's forefront nation as it tries to travel forwards scientifically.
On August 22 2011 17:39 BlackFlag wrote: People who blatantly refuse to acknowledge at least basic science are idiots. That's why it's important if they believe in evolution. Someone who rejects science because in his 2000 year old book stands something different shouldn't have any responsibility, especially they should not be president of a country.
I don't think that's exactly fair - I have a number of Christian friends who put in a lot of work helping their community either through the church, their jobs, or other charitable work. Unless their acts involve science teaching directly I'm not sure why it matters, they are otherwise upstanding and responsible people.
Obviously I agree when it comes to the presidency of the US but lets not dehumanise people so broadly just because they believe in creationism, ok?
Politics should be based on science, Natural Science and Arts (History and that stuff, I don't really know the common english expression for that type of studies). They can be supernice people I bet, but they shouldn't then work in a field that directly needs science (E.g. Politics).
On a personal level, I don't think I could hang out with people who believe in creationism and the likes. I have religious friends too, none of them believe in that stuff. I think not even the priest of our church believes in creationism. No one does in Europe, and people wouldn't be taken seriously, on no level. They may believe that god kickstarted evolution (or something like that)...
Political science is a scam on the grandest scale. Any science that makes normative statements is blatantly fallacious from the get-go. You cant take something like that seriously.
I disagree. And i wasn't talking bout political science only, but sociology, history etc. too.
On August 22 2011 20:22 RoyW wrote:
On August 22 2011 20:03 Josealtron wrote:
On August 22 2011 18:19 BlackFlag wrote:
On August 22 2011 18:06 Bubble-T wrote:
On August 22 2011 17:39 BlackFlag wrote: People who blatantly refuse to acknowledge at least basic science are idiots. That's why it's important if they believe in evolution. Someone who rejects science because in his 2000 year old book stands something different shouldn't have any responsibility, especially they should not be president of a country.
I don't think that's exactly fair - I have a number of Christian friends who put in a lot of work helping their community either through the church, their jobs, or other charitable work. Unless their acts involve science teaching directly I'm not sure why it matters, they are otherwise upstanding and responsible people.
Obviously I agree when it comes to the presidency of the US but lets not dehumanise people so broadly just because they believe in creationism, ok?
Politics should be based on science, Natural Science and Arts (History and that stuff, I don't really know the common english expression for that type of studies). They can be supernice people I bet, but they shouldn't then work in a field that directly needs science (E.g. Politics).
On a personal level, I don't think I could hang out with people who believe in creationism and the likes. I have religious friends too, none of them believe in that stuff. I think not even the priest of our church believes in creationism. No one does in Europe, and people wouldn't be taken seriously, on no level. They may believe that god kickstarted evolution (or something like that)...
Wait, seriously? I thought many people in Europe(or at least in places like Italy) believe in creationism. I live in the US and have only been to Europe once but is this actually true?
Basically, yes. Even here in Ireland, religious people believe in an Evolution facilitated by god. There are an incredibly small number of people who are creationists in the man was created 4-6 thousand years ago sense. And those are all ridiculed in mainstream culture.
If even the catholic church is more progressive, there's gotta be something wrong with the republican party.
Well, the intellectuals that backed Vatican II were, broadly, rather progressive people. The Catholic Church is still wrought with various deep problems, but if one looks at the modern Catholic church in the context of its entire history, the past century has been a very "progressive" time for the Catholics.
If excommunicating a 9 year old girl, (and her entire family) for getting an abortion after being raped by her step father counts as progressive, then sure, I'll agree.
What part of "within the context of its entire history" are you unable to understand? If we look at how the Catholic church is moving and compare that to the way Fundamentalism has moved in America in the past century, it is obvious that the Catholic church has been extremely progressive with Vatican II whereas Fundamentalism has turned a large part of American Christianity into what is perhaps the most disturbing expression of religion in the West. Ratzinger has been turning the Catholic church backwards from some of the progressive movements Vatican II has accomplished, but even so the Vatican has been more progressive than the Christian Right in America.
Great job on completely missing the context of what I said, and what I replied to.
I get what you're trying to say here, but honestly, if the Vatican gave a shit and really believed that church and science can coexist, they could, would and should do a hell of a lot more to achieve it in this modern scientific age. Their lack of involvement in the world stage is appalling. When you control a flock of people that large, there is no vested interest in just handing over even a fraction of that grip of power away to someone else.
Until then, scientists need to tip-toe around religious issues on the grounds of religious-tolerance and avoid being called a bigot because they found further proof that the world wasn't created in 7 days. Meanwhile, Republicans will continue to maintain a base of anti-science lunatics who will continue to bite at the ankles of the world's forefront nation as it tries to travel forwards scientifically.
I think a major thing that most people don't seem to really understand with the Catholic church is that it is incredibly large and there's a lot of diversity within it. It's more fruitful to understand it as a very large institution with its own internal division with its very conservative forces and liberal forces. There are conservative forces within the Vatican that wishes the progressive reforms of Vatican II to be reversed, and there are the liberals that have been labeled as heretics and those that have been excommunicated for being iconoclasts, etc. The internal struggles of the Vatican is complex. There have been many prominent figures within the Catholic church that truly wished and wishes for a "hell lot more" to be done, but the political realities dampen them. Then there are the large number of Catholics that are moronic, backwards, and outright immoral, etc.
I dislike the Catholic church for a large number of reasons, but I understand that the Vatican isn't a simple, unified body. There are the Rahners, the Sobrionos, and there are also the horrifying degenerates like the insanity that exists in the majority of the African continent.
As for Christianity in America, it's just a real shame. I'm honestly really bewildered at how a nation could have given birth to, sustained, and raised such a shit-for-brains mentality in such a large part of its population.
On August 23 2011 02:44 KaZzZz wrote: I just read on different sources that 40% of the Americans believe in creationism. Please tell me i didn't understand something or the figure is biased for any reason. Or it's the most unbelievable and saddest thing i have ever read. I had underestimated so much the percentage.
Since it's 40% of the whole population, i guess it's a vast majority of the Republicans. I don't know how to expresse clearly my felling, but it really scares me. It gives me the impression that there's a black sheep in the West, and it's the leader.
Oh and i'm agnostic, definitely not atheist. Please don't see there an heretic message.
I'm not sure how we are defining creationism, but I don't quite understand why you would be terrified that people believe a God created the world. That has been the common belief of most of the world, not just the US, for most of history.
Ofc by "believe in creationism" i don't mean "believe that there's a god" (or the percentage, i guess, would be way higher than 40% for the US).
I mean "believe the world is 6 thousand years old" (is that a correct sentence ?).
If that's our definition, then no, clearly 40% of Americans do not believe that the Earth is 6000 years old. And 63% of statistics are bullshit anyway...
On August 22 2011 04:51 TOloseGT wrote: The more I look at Huntsman, the more I like him. Too bad the Republican base can't see that.
He believes in evolution. How could the Republican party possibly nominate him?
That is the #1 issue among TL users apparently, whether or not the candidate believes in evolution.
Who gives a damn their stance on the economy, foreign policy, immigration... I just want my candidate to be likable, and relatable!
I think you miss the point.
No, clearly you are the one missing the point here. I've just read through 3 pages of people discussing politicians personal religious beliefs instead of the issues that are actually important. Those who say that their personal beliefs matter regarding how they will govern are using the same logic as Republican Christians who want their candidate to share their religious values.
Here's how I look ak the issue:
Do you believe in ending the wars in the middle east? Do you believe we should cut spending to reduce our deficit, beginning with military expenditures? Do you believe we should reverse the trend set by the "war on drugs"? Do you believe we should be doing more to prevent people from illegally entering the country? Do you believe in reducing the power and influence of the federal reserve?
If your answer is yes to these issues, then you should be supporting Ron Paul, regardless of his personal beliefs on religion or anything else. Despite people labeling him as nuts, he has amazingly sane policies. You hopefully have the common sense also to realize that when a libertarian advocates eliminating government functions or departments, they are speaking towards an ideal. Obviously Ron Paul wouldn't be able to eliminate the federal reserve or the income tax, and he doesn't think it's possible either. The idea is we should be working towards that ideal, instead of the opposite direction.
This is where you ignore all of these issues and disregard everything I said with "but he believes in X so he must be insane."
My original post was meant as "the Republican party will never nominate him because he believes in Evolution as opposed to Creationism" aka "the Republican party is insane"
On August 23 2011 11:38 Whitewing wrote: Screw it, I'm only voting for atheist candidates from now on, all these religious idiots don't have the brains to run the country well.
On August 23 2011 11:38 Whitewing wrote: Screw it, I'm only voting for atheist candidates from now on, all these religious idiots don't have the brains to run the country well.
Youre going to have to wait like 100 years till one of those shows up.
Atheists rank as one of the least trusted groups in America time and time again, i think lower then muslims even.
People used to say you can't be president if you ain't white but times are a changing. With that said, no atheist is going to win the presidency any time soon. Maybe some years down the road but not the 2012 election nor the 2016 election.
How can you vote for bachman? She's insane! Not only is she an extremely conservative chirstian fundamentalist with daddy issues, she also wants to ban gay rights, reduce labor rights, not tax greedy corporations at all and make the poor even more poor! And the tip of the iceberg, she wants to ban porn. What?!
On August 23 2011 23:33 zalz wrote: Atheists rank as one of the least trusted groups in America time and time again, i think lower then muslims even.
People used to say you can't be president if you ain't white but times are a changing. With that said, no atheist is going to win the presidency any time soon. Maybe some years down the road but not the 2012 election nor the 2016 election.
I get the sense that the atheist image in American suffers quite a bit from the "militant" atheists whose atheism goes behind simply not believing in God and goes more towards trying to impose atheism upon everyone else by relentlessly denegrating religion (like a Bill Maher-type atheist). As far as I am concerned, these atheists aren't really different than any other religious lunatic.
On August 24 2011 00:09 H0i wrote: How can you vote for bachman? She's insane! Not only is she an extremely conservative chirstian fundamentalist with daddy issues, she also wants to ban gay rights, reduce labor rights, not tax greedy corporations at all and make the poor even more poor! And the tip of the iceberg, she wants to ban porn. What?!
On August 24 2011 00:09 H0i wrote: How can you vote for bachman? She's insane! Not only is she an extremely conservative chirstian fundamentalist with daddy issues, she also wants to ban gay rights, reduce labor rights, not tax greedy corporations at all and make the poor even more poor! And the tip of the iceberg, she wants to ban porn. What?!
*spits out cereal.
Don't worry. The First Amendment protects the porn industry. The spank bank will never go dry.
EPT![[image loading]](http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Huntsman-tweet.gif)
