Could you vote for...

[Serial Midget]

a Presidential candidate who was a strict creationist, who did not believe in evolution?

[Silver]

No. Well, unless the other guy was and wanted to put homosexuals on the trains to the camps (did I just describe the Republican primary?)

When someone comes out and makes a statement of ignorance to that level, it says a lot about their effectiveness as a potential leader.

[Westy]

I could make assumptions about the person based on that belief that would make me not vote for them.

I'm not a single issue voter. I guess it is possible that a candidate could have that belief but did not want to make that part of any legislation. As long as I supported the rest of their platform I could vote for them.

[$tinkle]

a Presidential candidate who was a strict creationist, who did not believe in evolution?if they got to that position through critical thinking, yes.

if they got there b/c there was a whole pile of cash pushing them there, not so much.


were you & jr_bullit on some sort of shackleton expedition? come to think of it, i never did see you 2 in the same room at the same time...

[jimmydean]

I too like to look at the total package, but something like that would kill a deal for me.

There is no way I could vote for someone who doesn't understand science because it conflicts with a personal belief.

[reflux]

Agreed with Westy in the sense that those personal beliefs would have to remain apart from any proposed legislation. However, I'd still be cautious about my support.

[ohio]

I too like to look at the total package,

Who doesn't?
http://cameltoe.org/images/celeb.jpg

[SkaredShtles]

*Strict*?

Nope.

[ohio]

How about someone who doesn't believe in God?

It seems like these people either don't exist as politicians, or are terrified of identifying themselves as such.

[$tinkle]

How about someone who doesn't believe in God?not a concern, as so many of them have a god complex

[Westy]

Agreed with Westy in the sense that those personal beliefs would have to remain apart from any proposed legislation. However, I'd still be cautious about my support.

Has this ever happened? It seems most politicians campaign and are elected for their personal opinions with the mandate to then go act out those beliefs. When I was a idealistic youngin I thought democracy was all about electing a servant of the people who would then go act upon what they thought was the will of the people. :disgust1:

[reflux]

Has this ever happened? It seems most politicians campaign and are elected for their personal opinions with the mandate to then go act out those beliefs. When I was a idealistic youngin I thought democracy was all about electing a servant of the people who would then go act upon what they thought was the will of the people. :disgust1:
Has it ever happened? Not to the best of my knowledge.

The general population will only elect a Christian, or someone who holds "Christian values" as part of their belief system. That much is a fact. But how does the general population react when said politician wants to put those beliefs in writing via legislation? Bad reactions across the board (evangelicals and rednecks excl). What are we to do? Perhaps the best example I can think of is how several politicians have answered the question about gay marriage: leave the decision up to the state.

[skinny mike]

if they got to that position through critical thinking, yes.
the fact that you think "critical thinking" and "creationist" go together amuses me.

[Serial Midget]

Well my answer is no, I couldn't do it. I understand that 3 of 5 Republican hopefuls claim to be creationists. I'm wonder if evolutionist will be this coming election's code word.

[Changleen]

if they got to that position through critical thinking, yes.If they got to thinking creationism was the truth by 'critical thinking'? :p :p :p Are you serious? You'd vote for someone whose grip on reality was that tenuous?

[$tinkle]

the fact that you think "critical thinking" and "creationist" go together amuses me.ok, it's like this: i'm an old earth creationist, & i believe the universe is 13.5 billion years old (give or take an epoch). you know how i got to that?

science.

the bible teaches me how to live & how to think; it's not an encyclopedia.

check it: http://www.rationalchristianity.net/unknown_verses.html#crit

[Kihaji]

If they got to thinking creationism was the truth by 'critical thinking'? :p :p :p Are you serious? You'd vote for someone whose grip on reality was that tenuous?

As opposed to the "magical" birth of the universe, life, and everything as we know it?

Here is something for you to consider, Science is nothing more than the next evolution of Religion. They are both nothing more than an attempt at a rationalization of our universe, and they both are based on things you must accept purely on faith.

[jimmydean]

ok, it's like this: i'm an old earth creationist, & i believe the universe is 13.5 billion years old (give or take an epoch). you know how i got to that?

science.

the bible teaches me how to live & how to think; it's not an encyclopedia.

check it: http://www.rationalchristianity.net/unknown_verses.html#crit

I think it might be a gross generalization, but when I think of "creationist", I think of the crazy bastard that thinks the Earth is 6000 years old and dinosaurs lived in the age of man.

I think that somewhere someone/something was created because it had to start SOMEWHERE. But I am far from what most would consider a creationist.

[Silver]

Here is something for you to consider, Science is nothing more than the next evolution of Religion. They are both nothing more than an attempt at a rationalization of our universe, and they both are based on things you must accept purely on faith.

Goddamn, I'm getting tired of correcting this. Where's OMGF when you need him?

[Secret Squirrel]

She don't lie,
She don't lie,
She don't liiiiiii-iie,
.
.
Cocaine.

[H8R]

Voting for a strict creationist is like voting for a candidate who publicly believes in the easter bunny.

[jimmydean]

Voting for a strict creationist is like voting for a candidate who publicly believes in the easter bunny.

That's awesome.

[fluff]

Goddamn, I'm getting tired of correcting this. Where's OMGF when you need him?

He and Andyman are sure to take over at least one of the current threads, surely?

[H8R]

Reminds me of an SNL re-run episode we saw this weekend. During Weekend Update they ran this bit:

“In Georgia this week, a compromise was reached that will allow the word ‘evolution’ to continue to be used in classrooms. As a trade-off, however, the word ‘dinosaur’ will be replaced with ‘Jesus horse.’”

With a pic of a triceratops.

We laughed uncontrollably.

[ohio]

Voting for a strict creationist is like voting for a candidate who publicly believes in the easter bunny.

Wait, what are you trying to say about the Easter Bunny?

[ohio]

Here is something for you to consider, Science is nothing more than the next evolution of Religion.

So you accept evolution then?

Finally, we're getting through to you!

[Silver]

Wait, what are you trying to say about the Easter Bunny?

He got into a car accident last year. The bad news is Santa has a meth problem and may not make it to Christmas this year...

[Secret Squirrel]

So you accept evolution then?

Finally, we're getting through to you!

I've never seen regression go so quickly before...

[Kihaji]

So you accept evolution then?

Finally, we're getting through to you!

Evolution and "Intelligent Design" are not mutually exclusive. Oh wait, you thought they were, how cute.

[H8R]

Evolution and "Intelligent Design" are not mutually exclusive. Oh wait, you thought they were, how cute.

I think you need to start wearing a helmet when you ride.

[Kihaji]

I think you need to start wearing a helmet when you ride.


"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."

I'll leave it up to you to find out who said that.

[Secret Squirrel]

I think you need to start wearing a helmet when you ride.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e385/secretsquirrelz/SpecEd.jpg

[ohio]

Evolution and "Intelligent Design" are not mutually exclusive. Oh wait, you thought they were, how cute.

Wow that just whizzed right over your head, didn't it?

I'll stick to pee and poop jokes for you from now on.

[Secret Squirrel]

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."

I'll leave it up to you to find out who said that.

And this is a means to a whatnow?

[$tinkle]

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."

I'll leave it up to you to find out who said that.michael stipe?

[Secret Squirrel]

michael stipe?

Rofl. Well done, sir. Well done.

[H8R]

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."

I'll leave it up to you to find out who said that.

Some flunky.

[reflux]

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."

I'll leave it up to you to find out who said that.
"Don't look a gift horse in the mouth"
- Anonymous

[jimmydean]

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."

I'll leave it up to you to find out who said that.

Tom Cruise

[Dartman]

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."

I'll leave it up to you to find out who said that.

Maybe, but a pint of beer is worth a half credit in philosophy.