E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSFrom NBC's Ali Weinberg
Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum railed against former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman’s statement that the Republican Party risks becoming the “anti-science” party.
Speaking to a group of about 90 people at the Beacon Drive-In in Spartanburg, SC, a popular stop for presidential candidates, Santorum did not mention Gov. Huntsman by name but brought up his fellow candidate’s assertions, made on TV and via Twitter, that the Republican Party would have a “huge problem” if it became hostile to evolution and climate change.
“We are going through this debate right now by somebody who’s in the Republican field talking about people who believe in certain scientific theories, whether it’s global warming or evolution. And somehow or another if you believe that we are creatures of a loving God, that that is somehow anti-science,” Santorum said. “It’s not anti-science. It’s an affirmation of what we view in the world. Which is, we see God."
Santorum was also asked to explain his 2004 endorsement of Sen. Arlen Specter, his fellow Pennsylvania Republican Senator who later became a Democrat, over former Rep. Pat Toomey, who defeated Specter six years later.
“If the worst thing you have to say about my record in 16 years in public life is that I endorsed my Republican colleague who I’d served with for 10 years in the Senate for re-election, then I think I’m in pretty good shape,” Santorum said.
He added that he was most concerned with conserving Republicans’ Senate majority and ensuring a clear path for President George W. Bush’s appointees to the Supreme Court, who all opposed abortion rights.
Santorum also criticized President Obama for announcing he would release a plan for job creation when he returned from his vacation on Martha’s Vineyard, which he cut short due to concerns over Hurricane Irene, according to a White House spokesman.
“If it’s a great economic plan and it’s really going to get America moving, why do we have to wait until after your vacation to know what it is?” Santorum said.
Leave a Comment:
They risk becoming the anti-science party, they already are the anti-science party.
When you have the front runner Perry being put in place to lead us to the rapture. I can't see how it can get any more anti-science than that.
This coming from a moron who thinks the "Flinstones" is a documentary!
He should stick to things he's experienced in - like making jam!
PS: Has he left Tommy's Ham House yet?
Maybe moved on to something a little more vogue like Suzie's Sushi Shack?
They are the anti-junk science party.
Creationism?
I dunno, but there is no dispute that there is no empirical evidence that Obama has the capability of creating 1 new net job.
My, my -- he sure can draw the crowds now can't he?
Did they serve brontosaurus burgers with a side of fries @ the Beacon Drive-In?
Yabbba Dabba DO!
Bob you are aware of Perry and his Army of God aren't you? Are you comfortable with having a president who backers chose him to lead the United States to the rapture?
You don't like President Obama but that is okay with you? Wow, Bob, wow what can I say?
What does God sound like when he talks to you?
I never gave political contributions in my life until Bob Casey ran against Santorum. I gave Casey $250, and was enthralled to be part of Santorum's defeat. Santorum is despicable, small minded, and an uncompromising ideologue. The fact that he is a national Republican candidate helps explain why I struggle with voting Republican. Yes, I am for small government, and pro business. But these religious zealots who bring their extremist views into the public sphere must never get sway over this country. If you want theocracy, go to the Muslim world. They have plenty of it. I do not say this lightly: I LOATHE SANTORUM.
Americans First -- So true. Has he not heard of the anti-intellectualism movement?
The religious-right became even more anti-science when their literal belief in the Bible came into question, most notably evolution and age of the Earth. It has mushroomed from there to climate change being a hoax and anything progressive. Now conservatives are anti-FACT, period.
Heck, the Teapublicans are already the anti-education party....so that pretty well covers everything!
AF,
Nope, don't know about any Army of God.
Do they preach God Damn America like Obama's pastor?
TP,
85% of Americans believe in God. You marginalizing all those guys?
Intellectuals?
Who's an intellectual, Obama? All his academia genuises?
You want to defend these morons, excuse me intellectual morons.
Climate change?
So big guy - is it warming or cooling.
Do you really want to argue if it's anthropogenic?
1) Lots of white preachers preach "God Damn America", every time a disaster happens they claim it is because of teh gay. That is just as bad as anything (in fact, it is worse because at least Rev. Wright bases his anger on historical fact, not total BS) Obama's preacher does.
2) Belief in God doesn't matter in terms of pure intelligence or even scientific literacy, as long as it doesn't prevent you from believing in proven science. Once it does (re Evolution, for example) then it turns you into a religious zealot and fool. Are you in either of those categories?
3) Yup, those intellectual and academics (BTW nice typos) are smarter than you and your ilk will ever be.
4) Climate change causes different regions of the world to behave differently. For example, almost the entire planet north of 50°N is significantly warmer today than in any other time humans have walked the planet, but other areas (such as China, and parts of the former Soviet Union) are so covered with soot and sulfurous particulates that they are actually colder today than in decades. That's because they've generated so much pollution in many areas they don't get full sunlight anymore.
None of this matter to people like you, who are simply dumber than a sack of rocks.
Nicely done Dendroica
Here's another take on the subject from someone I know the Teapublicans just love..(Richard Dawkins)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/post/attention-governor-perry-evolution-is-a-fact/2011/08/23/gIQAuIFUYJ_blog.html
Bob, guess what, many people can BOTH believe in God AND also believe in science - who would have thunk? As in most things these days, the USA no longer leads in science or scientific research, relying on American scientists is now relying on second rate science. If you have a look outside of the USA (that there are billions more people outside of the USA than inside it is an amazing revelation, I know), 99% of scientists DO believe that there is global warming AND it is man made. Many of those scientists also believe in God. They are not mutually exclusive positions.
So, Santorium sees God, and therefore we can plunder the planet and remain heedless to the science of climatology. Yeah, I see the connection there. Very logical, right?
Saying one believes in science is missing the whole point of science. Science doesn't care what you "believe." Science just asks, "What works?" Newton's laws of gravity "work" for shooting cannon balls, jumping off buildings, and going to the moon. They fail for very strong gravitational fields. The theory of gravity (General Relativity) works for very strong gravitational fields. It doesn't work for the very small, hence the theory of quantum mechanics (one of several indications that General Relativity will eventually be replaced by a more consistently applicable theory). The theory of evolution works for explaining living things. That's why it is part of modern science, not because scientists "believe" anything. Dis-functionality in science occurs when belief becomes more important than the scientific method. A scientist can do religion, or whatever, as long as he or she relates to scientific knowledge through the scientific method. What I find scary are those who don't care what works as long as we believe. We've done that, been there, didn't work. It works even less so as the consequences of getting it wrong become ever more consequential.
It seems to me that people who are so literal about the Bible shows that they actually lack faith.
I also believe that the universe and the earth are billions of years old and not 7,000 years old. I believe in evolution. Just because I believe in these facts doesn't lessen my faith in God.
It looks to me that people who takes rejects science actually have less faith in God than people like myself. They are implying that if certain passages concerning creation isn't true, then God is not real.
That is what it looks like to me.
Accepting evolution and knowing the actual age of the earth DOES reduce faith in God. If you accept certain parts of science and embrace myth, you're just rationalizing. The pursuit of science has quite convincingly laid bare the anecdotal and fanciful stories written in the Bible. People choose to believe in God to relieve uncertainty and fear. But fear of the unknown does not a God make.
Hunstman is correct that the GOP is trending toward an anti-science party. However, he is being disingenuous. Huntsman furthers the myth of God by believing in a 200-year old story that Jesus and God appeared in North American to a what was probably a lonely, searching person by the name of Joseph Smith. At least the Tea Party types are truer to their beliefs. Forget science and believe in what you want. Making up stories about the nature of life has been the history of humanity for millennia.
believeing in science is believeing in proveable fact ..believeing in evolution is believeing in proveable fact .. religion is neither right nor wrong its just not a proveable fact....my niece had a cancer and it was removed by doctors useing a proven fact of medicine ... not all cancer is cured this way .. there has never been a documented case of a malignant cancer prayed away .. even Santorum knows that when a family member of his gets sick it is science that cures not prayer
Independent Jim, I have to disagree with one point the one about healing yourself. It has nothing to do with God, it is what our bodies were meant to do.
It all started about 20 years ago. I had a large long mole on my left forearm that was growing bigger and was in such a place I was always hitting it and making it bleed as only moles can bleed. It was suggested that I could meditate it away. So I started meditating and imagining little pac-man sort of creatures that I told to eat the growing tissue and to stop when it reached the normal skin.
Within 4 four months of meditating several times a day the mole kept shrinking and shrinking and finally disappeared to have never returned.
It started as a teenager my body had lots of moles under my arms some on my arms and a couple on the bottom of my eyelid. They had all been slowly growing, I had some 1/2 inch long. I started meditating on my entire body and told it to do what it had done to remove the first mole but not intently like the first mole. Meditating on moles is as about exciting as watching paint dry. Nowadays I may meditate once a month on removing moles if that much.
Out of the twenty or so large moles that were once on my body at 62 I now have 6 just looked and they are nearly flat way smaller around,two are nearly gone and no new ones.
I am thinking that if you can meditate moles away, you can meditate cancer away. I don't pray to anybody, I just tell my body to do what it is supposed to do. I believe in God, I just don't think it is his job to take care of my body.
Americans First- do you have any evidence of this self-healing? I do not wish to accuse, but your story sounds slightly made-up, and I do not think I, nor anyone else, should believe it on faith. Or could.
That being said, let me return to the main point. I believe that the GOP is currently extremely anti-science. I believe anyone who wishes to teach a completely non-science backed story alongside a 99.9% proven-through-science theory in a science class is anti-science. I also believe that anyone who doesn't believe in the findings of top scientists regarding global warming is anti-science. And I believe a party that has among its front runners someone who believes the Environmental Protection Agency should be completely eliminated (Michele Bachmann) is most definitely anti-science.
“It’s not anti-science. It’s an affirmation of what we view in the world. Which is, we see God."
Affirmations vs. observable events.
That glass house you live in, Rick, is parrying very thin.
He sees God, and God says that the science of climatology is run by quacks and we should sell the federal lands to the oil companies. It is all very clear, when you see god.
FLAT EARTH SOCIETY: "we are not anti-science. what a ridiculous thing to say" ...
The anti-science or anything intelligent party spokesmen, Santorum has two things on First Read about him in one day. First I found out who he was by googling him! "YUK" Big mistake! Now I have to read about him again talking about my president's plans for jobs. "He has a jobs plan, but he has to go to the bathroom before he presents it to us?" "He sleeps at night while we are all in danger from Al Qaeda?" "He loves his daughters more than he loves me. That's just not right!" "Whaaa! Whaaa! Whaaa!
"We see God".
Where?
Pat Robertson said the crack in the Washington Monument was a message from God.
How does Robertson know that? He doesn't. He made it up.
Of course they are anti-Science.
As far as President Obama's job plan.
Well, he is going to have it. Because the Republicans in the House, as usual, didn't do their jobs. Pass the buck. Lazy lazy lazy.
President Obama is back from his vacation. And why did he take a vacation? Because he actually works for a living.
See all these "regular" people out there, preparing the east coast in case of a disaster. They will be working 24/7 to keep Americans safe. They care about their jobs. And they ask nothing in return. Just that we do our part to ensure that our families are safe and sound, especially our elderly.
We don't need Ron Paul to tell us that.
The House had two years to put together a Jobs Plan. They couldn't do it. And that's because they're not regular people. They are out to make our lives miserable, just to make President Obama look bad.
I'll take regular people any day of the week. They believe in science and know the dangers of this storm and how at risk everybody is. I see Governors all over tv, taking care to be sure people are hearing them.
Cantor is a despicable human being.
Ron Paul. Interesting what he said today. Go back to the 1900's when people were self-sufficient? Really?Texas?
Wasn't Texas a slave state?
Wiki:
Although Mexico abolished most of its slavery in 1829, an exemption was made for Texas which had many slaves as a result of extensive cotton production by the Anglo settlers, primarily in east Texas.
Since Texas had slaves prior to being admitted to the Union, it became a slave state by being admitted to the Union with no restriction on what was an already existing practice.
This did not happen quickly, however. There was great tension in the U.S. about admitting another slave state resulting in the decision to admit Texas being delayed for almost 10 years after it was first proposed by the Republic of Texas. The decision to admit Texas ultimately resulted in war with Mexico and the eventual relinquishment by Mexico of Texas and giant expanses of land to the west (now New Mexico and Arizona) and the state of California.
All of this continued to strain national bonds which were temporarily soothed by the Compromise of 1850.
__________________________________________
We're all self-sufficient up here Ron Paul. We always were. And we have the people from FEMA and other agencies to thank when we need assistance in case of emergencies such as this.
They are the backbone of the country. Not you. Or Texas.
Pat, You covered every point that Paul, Santorum and old Bob180 tried to explain away. Thanks!!
Pat -- be safe my friend!
I will be thinking of you this weekend...
The decision to admit Texas ultimately resulted in war with Mexico and the eventual relinquishment by Mexico of Texas...............
Do you think it's too late to ask them to take it back?
Chuck-3590742,
I'm with you Chuck. But first, lets make sure we dump all our nuclear waste on Texas first. We can do that now thanks to Rick Perry. I'm sure Texas farmers and citizens drinking water in that state are thrilled with their governor over that decision. Once all the "waste" (nuclear and political) takes residence in Texas . . . we should give it back.
Right Pat.
Texas was a slave state in the 1900's.
Idiot.
Texas won its independence from Mexico in 1836, becoming the Republic of Texas. The U.S. annexed Texas in 1845. Mexico objected, ignoring the outcome of the Texas revolution. None of it had to do with slavery. It had to do with something called "Manifest Destiny". Slavery was an issue after 1845. The compromise of 1850 did little except postpone the Civil War for 11 years,. Oh wait... it did finally abolish slavery in Washington, D.C. which had the largest slave market in the U.S. at the time.
The appearance of being anti-science is unavoidable when you confuse science with a belief system. Scientific fact and theory is not subject to our beliefs. Just because someone may not believe in the theory of gravity does not mean they suddenly fly off the Earth out into space. Religion is a belief system and, though I think religious beliefs should be respected, are not subject to the scientific method and are therefore unprovable.
I agree. I encourage people to consider the following dichotomy - science is how things happen, whereas theology explains why they happen. The existence of evolution or the Big Bang does not diminish the Christian ideal of God, unless you as Christians let it. There's nothing wrong with saying, "Evolution? That's an awesome system that God developed there." As a non-Christian, I may not personally agree, but I would respect your viewpoint.
Science is the process of determining truth through observation. Don't shut your eyes if you don't agree with the truth.
Theology doesn't explain anything, especially 'why' things happen. There is no dichotomy between science and theology, just poorly conceived questions ('why' evolution happens? makes about as much sense as, what is the cubed root of banana?) . There is something wrong with saying "Evolution? That's an awesome system that God developed there.", because it is factually incorrect.
That statement wouldn't be factually anything Scientist, since we have no facts regarding God one way or another. I'm fine with people coopting as much science as they can into their religious beliefs.
Personally I prefer to keep them completely separate.
Did Santorum really say that he is most concerned about conserving the Republican majority in the senate?
Maybe he should lay off the sauce next time he's at Tommy,s Ham House.
I think he meant when he supported Specter, who was at the time a Republican.
The problem is, Rick, that issue doesn't even make the top 100 list of reasons why you constituents kicked you sorry ass out of Congress.
"SOMEONE PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO MEEEEE!"
-Rick Santorum
I think Santorum could be a very effective tool in a Psychology 101 classroom setting, allowing a focal point for the identification of psychopathologies. Actually, I have to partially retract that: the Republican field of candidates is filled with such people. Santorum might not be that unusual now that I come to think of it. Of course, Romney seems reasonable, other than the fact that he is a member of a religion that threw $25 million into California to defeat gay marriage, and a religion that thinks when you die, if you have been a good little boy or girl, you get to start your own planet as a God....I have a hard time respecting people who are from that religion. They need to suspend critical reasoning to swallow that BS. Romney, however, does seem more like a businessman, but a power-hungry one at that, who made his fortune shipping jobs oversees. I think I'm gonna stick with BHO.
Not another DAM WEIRDO ! What a truly disgusting group the GOP is ...Out of touch with 88% of the USA !
I actually prefer conservative fiscal policies. A core, strong and organized central government is fine, but ours is bloated to the point of economic disaster, and I think most people understand that and would vote for someone who was serious about downsizing government a bit and getting the government less involved in the personal lives of americans.
So why is it that the only candidates pushing this idea are also religious nuts who want to broaden government authority into people's lives and base our national policy on what they perceive is the word of God. I would vote republican if they didn't GUARANTEE that the person with their finger on the button of our nuclear weapons and at the helm of the world's largest military BELIEVES FULLY THAT THE END OF THE WORLD IS AT HAND. I CAN'T vote for that. I think Obama is a failure as a president and is not leading us in the right direction, but I HAVE to vote for him or a third party candidate to ensure that my country doesn't start a holy war.
Is there a party for me? Or a country? Because I am just baffled by our political choices.
I agree. I am an agnostic, and I just want a life free of bigots telling me to believe in their magical sky daddy. I don't care about the afterlife; I care about how to make THIS world a better place. It disheartens me to realize that our Founding Fathers understand and proclaimed via law that this country was not founded as a Christian country (read Article XI of the Treaty of Tripoli, which was passed unanimously by the Senate and signed into law in 1797), but today's looney religious right seems to think we were.
However, I cannot vote for Obama. He is a terrible leader and a borderline Socialist. I am an American, not a Communist. If the choice is between Obama and Perry (or Bachman), I will do something I have never done: I will not vote for anyone for President.
No Nuts Please. The problem is that the GOP has not been fiscally conservative for 30 years, not since before Ronald Reagan. They talk about it but their actions prove otherwise. One only needs to study the true GOP fiscal conservatives of Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford and their legislator counterparts of that era to understand that the republican party no longer represents fiscal conservative values. They have become the social and religious conservative party, the selfish party of no taxes for those things greatly needed by the collective society. The GOPTP of today does not know what true fiscal conservative means.
No, they aren't the anti-science party == they can always come up with some fringe scientific loonies to back them up.
Perry and co. apply this warped logic/thinking to history as well and non-separation of church and state! Why does this remind me so much of naziism??
I am Catholic, went to a Catholic grade school, high school, and University, (I am not trying to offend anybodys religious beliefs) I had a lot of theolgy classes and a lot os science classes never both ar the same time. At mass a priest mixes water and wine and prays over it and Catholcs believe it turns into the blood of Christ, the same Jesuit priests do not do that experiment in science class becuase it never works, and you know what they are okay with that. They will tell you one is a matter of faith, which is believeing in things that can not be proven or replicated and the other is a matter of science which depends on physical proof and replication of results. Many of us believe that miracles can happen, but we can't go out to the garage and perform them. Mixing science and religion demeans them both, and mixing religion with politics is a very dangerous road to go down.
Santorum is a self-proclaimed Creationist sympathizer.
What can I say? Any sufficiently advanced cluelessness is indistinguishable from humor. It really would be funny if it were not so sad. I applaud Huntsman: Evidently an individual of character who speaks what is true rather than what is expected by the fundamentalists.
I agree. Huntsman is intelligent. That's why they hate him.
The Repub party is now anti-science, anti-education, anti-history, anti separation of church-state.... Is this the rise of the 4th Reich??!!!
“It’s not anti-science. It’s an affirmation of what we view in the world. Which is, we see God."
The level of cognitive dissonance in people like Santorum is stunning. "It doesn't matter what science thinks, it's our narrow brand of belief that matters most, and, if elected president, I'll do my very best to serve God and not the will of the American people. We see God, not evidence, which is from the devil. Anyone who supports evidential science over my peculiar religion should be burned at the stake. The Voices have told me I have divine permission to do that."
SANTORUM 2010: VOTE IN THE NEW DARK AGES!
NoNutsPlease, both Bachmann and Perry are politicians with a religious agenda. It is more than the standard cultural issues that they are opposed to because of their faith. They see that the best for America is a theocracy. Goggle any of the religious organizations that support them. Perry has his Army of God, David Barton and the Providence foundation. Bachmann has said many time that "God had a laser beam on her" when she ran for Congress and won.
Science is something that makes sense, expands by logical proof based on evidence, and is understandable. On the other hand, god is unknowable, and nonunderstandable, and you just have to have "faith" -- that is, just believe what the church tells you, without evidence, and by all means, keep putting your money in the collection plate.
Huntsman is the one sane GOP candidate running.
Santorum: We're not anti-science. We just think that evidence-based conclusions should be disregarded whenever they conflict with our pre-existing beliefs, biases, and financial interests.
Rick, it is possible to accept the theory of evolution and still believe in god; many people do, though I am not one of them. What is impossible is reconciling fundamentalist Christianity and its literal reading of Genesis with reality.
Rick Santorum is the most anti-science candidate of all the clowns running for the republican nomination and that is saying a lot. The man demands a biblical understanding of everything and if science disagrees with the bible, he will side with the bible every time.
"Rick Santorum is the most anti-science candidate of all the clowns running for the republican nomination..."
Not while Goodhair lives, he isn't. I'll put Goodhair against the most right wing religionist as being anti-science and give you 3 - 1 odds. He doesn't believe his scientists that told him that putting in a radioactive waste dump in West Texas would contaminate the Ogallala aquifer. He doesn't accept that reality is described by evolution or that global warming even exists despite the record drought and record wildfires that one finds in Texas if you bother to go out of the house. He doesn't believe that smoke from coal fired electrical generation plants affects the health of people downwind. He doesn't believe that the waste from petroleum refineries is toxic. There are a whole plethora of things that have been shown to be beyond doubt that he doesn't believe.
dkm, I think you presume too much about what Perry believes. It is more likely that he simply doesn't care.
Not anti-science, just don't believe in "theories" like evolution and global warming. Believe in "scientific theories" like God made everything in seven days and there is no global warming. This is pro-science? How does the theory of gravity grab them?
Do you even have a clue what "theory" means? It is an idea of how something might have happened or might work or function. Gravity is NOT a theory, but evolution and global warming..oops, I mean "climate change" are
Gravity most assuredly IS a theory.
And speaking of having a clue as to the meaning of "theory," it seems that you got lost somewhere. In science a theory is a former hypothesis that has such a large body of supporting evidence that it can no longer be denied. Examples would be evolution, electromagnetism, relativity, gravity, global warming, radioactivity, the expanding universe, heliocentric solar system, plate tectonics, germs, the infinity of human stupidity, etc.
Gravity and Evolution are facts. Even Climate Change is a fact - the theories are about exploring and explaining how these phenomena happen. We probably have a better idea of how Evolution occurs than we do about the mechanism of gravity, altho we have a better system using the existence of gravity to predict all kinds of other things . We don't know the extent of humanities effect on the climate, but the FACT that it's changing is impossible to dismiss. Not all of it is about blaming humans, much of the work being done is what effects we will see now and in the future, and predicting the consequences (like if everyone on the coast will drown if the ice caps continue melting, or more likely what happens to all the penguins). People need a better understanding of the lingo.
Gravity is a fact. Evolution and climate change are not facts. They have yet to be proven. If you choose to believe something thats fine but don't confuse facts and beliefs. If they are yours thats fine. Someone else has the right to think what they want.
Climate change is a hoax on the world and if people took the time to look at both sides of the issue instead of buying into a lie 1970, first earth day they said we where going into an ice age...well what happened to that? This is about redistribution of wealth and there is plenty of proof of that! Stop and do independent research and maybe you will actually find the truth of the matter.
Neither gravity nor evolution are facts. Gravity is referred to as a law basically because it stands on firmer foundations than other theories but it is a scientific theory nonetheless.
"Stop and do independent research and maybe you will actually find the truth of the matter."
You're telling others to do "independent research" when you don't know the difference between scientific theory and the colloquial use of the word 'theory'? Really?
No, gravity is a fact. The fact being that objects with mass are attracted to one another. That's distinct from the theory of gravity, which everything we think we know about how it works. Evolution is a fact - life began on Earth as simple, single celled organisms, and over time they became more distinct, varied and complex - that's a FACT. We know that. The theory is how/why. Climate change is also a fact, insomuch that the climate is always changing - PART of the current theory is that Man has begun effecting his environment on a global scale.
Facts in science tend to be simple, repeated observations. Apples fall, the moon revolves around the Earth, the fossil record shows us life getting simpler and simpler the further back we look, average global temperatures rise and fall, etc. Explanations for why these things occur are hypothesis are theory, with theory in science being the closest we can generally get to a definitive answer.
So the GOP is not anti-science? What does that mean? I do not know why I wasted my time posting anything which involves Santorum. The man is a thud without a dud.
Simply too sad that people like this are even taken seriously in this country.
So, if you believe in God, you must then believe He caused global warming, not people? And you must also believe the universe is 6,000 years old? Since the Bible takes precedence over all of modern science, geology, biology, astronomy, cosmology, anthropology, etc, I wonder if Santorum gives it precedence over the American Constitution which was A) written by mere mortals, and B) is less than 250 years old. I mean, after all, God is Lord of all.
Biology in the study of the cell points to intelligent design not evolution. If you are allowed to follow the evidence and it is allowed to be revealed then you may want to change your point of view. Since science has taken a evolution stance it continues to add million and billions of years to earths age because it has to.
They can't explain how things work so they keep making the earth older in hope to explain that time and chance made it so! I learned these things not based on a religious point of view, rather what is the evidence. Not a single person of science can explain the cambrian explosion and yet they keep telling us the same old tale. time and chance. Well that explains nothing!
"If you are allowed to follow the evidence and it is allowed to be revealed then you may want to change your point of view. "
Oh, and who revealed this secret evidence to you?
"Since science has taken a evolution stance it continues to add million and billions of years to earths age because it has to."
Uh, no. Because the evidence DEMONSTRATES it.
"Not a single person of science can explain the cambrian explosion and yet they keep telling us the same old tale."
One of the great things about science is there is always more to learn and understand.
Many of you posters on this site scoff at Christians for believing in God and creationism, because you claim they are anti-science. Whom do you plan to vote for in 2012 for president? President Obama is a Christian and so are most Republican hopefuls. Clearly, no sane person could vote for any of them.
Who will you vote for instead of the Bible-believing Christian, President Obama?
Not all Christians believe in creationism. Most reasonable adults are aware of that.
Ash,
Let us reason together as adults. When I say creationism, I mean that Christians believe that God created the world by some method. I am not discounting evolution as a possible tool of God to design species over time. If there are Christians that don't believe that God made the earth and universe, I'd sure like to hear their alternate explanation.
My main point was this: How could people who label Christians as misguided, myth-worshiping, anti-science kooks vote for a Christian candidate like Obama for President? And I have trouble buying the argument that at least Obama is not a fanatical Christian. He's still a Christian, and therefore a myth-worshiper.
I don't care who or what you worship. I do care if you try to impose your worship on others, use it as an excuse to deny people their equal rights, or let a literal reading of a fairy tale interfere with the work of science and the quality of our children's education.
Has Obama done any of those things? Have Republicans like Santorum and Bachmann? There is your difference.
Edukated Man,
When people deride "creationism", their definition is much more specific than yours. They are referring to belief in the literal truth of the Genesis account. Lots of Christians, on the other hand, believe that God was responsible for the sequence of scientifically-accepted mechanisms that ultimately led to the formation of the solar system and Earth, and the rise and evolution of life upon Earth. Not in 6000 years, but over millions of years. THAT belief does not conflict with science at all, as science is not in the business of stating who or what was responsible for it all.
If it weren't for the bible thumpers demanding that everyone be religious, we wouldn't know about President Obama's faith or church. In past elections, other than Kennedy being a catholic I don't remember it being brought up. When Kennedy didn't turn our country over to the pope, people decided his religion didn't matter.
This new thing, this movement to the church taking over our government and ending abortions for the church, but seem to have no problem starving the child to death after it is born. This was the whole reason to have a separation of church and state. Churches think they can legislate morality. They get all wacko-cracko and pretty soon they are trying to default the government to get their way.
What's next throw women in prisons for abortions and of course throw gay men in prison. Or will we become more modern and just start stoning again. Perhaps we could feed the poor and old to the lions for the riches pleasure. Rush could be there whipping the crowd up into a killing frenzy that he does so well.
I get it, the anti-abortion crowd are the suckers to vote for the rich never paying their fair share of taxes again. Voting republican will not make you part of the rapture, in fact voting republican will create he!! on earth.
While the republicans are getting rid of abortions they will also be getting rid of your social security and medicare and medicaid. They will get rid of the EPA that stands between the corporations and protecting the earth for future generations. Clean air and clean water are essential to our continued living on this planet.
The rapture is just another version of the 72 virgins story. The good things that will happen to you if you are faithful to your religion.
Obama actually made a PSA in support of evolution and other scientific principles that was broadcast to schools. So, there's your first difference. Ash summed it up nicely. I'm a Christian myself, that someone is religious isn't the problem. Outright denials of scientific fact and theory, are.
Americans first
It is views such as yours that makes a conservative person's religion an issue. Liberal "intellectuals" who seek only to demonize the opposition because they have no ideas and their champion has turned out to be a colossal failure.
You are right. When Kennedy didn't let his religion run the country no one made a big deal of it. After a decade Perry has not turned Texas into some kind of theocracy. Palin didn't turn Alaska into one either. No matter what the moonbats claim. Attacking a person's religion actually puts one in the minority since 80% of Americans are religious.
Perhaps you should concentrate your ire on such zealots such as Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick who believes govt should control every facet of a person's life. People speak out about abortion because they don't agree with it. I happen to believe the two "rights" people truly deserve are the right to that first breath and the right to be left alone if you're not harming anyone. Everything else is good fortune. But that's just me.
FYI....Most Christians do not believe in the "rapture". You may not understand it's origin. Here is an article that accurately describes where it came from:
http://www.reformedonline.com/view/reformedonline/rapture.htm
Obama is not a christian that at least i can see. He said in an interview in 2004 in a Chicago paper that he did not believe in the basic christian tenents. He supports gay marriage, and abortion. He spent 20 years going to a church, if you call it that, where they took Gods name in vain. He is also know to, with his wife, go to flag burnings. So I see this guy as nothing more than looking for votes from christians. And all the muslim ties he has, and bowing to arab kings! Sorry the man is not truthful in any way.
Say what you want about the rapture. But do some reading about Perry's Army of God and that is their exact plan is for Perry to lead us to the rapture. Maybe you though I was joking. That is Perry's plan for real. His very presidency is about the church taking over the government. The Texas Quarterly broke the story.
Perry is 3rd out of 50 states with the highest teen pregnancy. He and Palin claims abstention works.
Perry is 47th out of 50 in percentage of kids graduating high school.
Perry is #1 in having the highest percentage of low paid workers without retirement, health care, sick leave.
I call him Scarry Perry because he is such a convincing liar. He looks like he actually believes what he is saying while he is lying to your face. By the way, on the way to the rapture he wants to kill social security for those of us left so it will truly be he!! on earth.
for the love of America Obama 2012
"Obama is not a christian that at least i can see. He said in an interview in 2004 in a Chicago paper that he did not believe in the basic christian tenents. He supports gay marriage, and abortion. He spent 20 years going to a church, if you call it that, where they took Gods name in vain. He is also know to, with his wife, go to flag burnings. So I see this guy as nothing more than looking for votes from christians. And all the muslim ties he has, and bowing to arab kings! Sorry the man is not truthful in any way."
Wow, back away from the Fox, shimloom!
What would flag burning have to do with his religion anyway, if we pretended for a moment that was true.
There are Christian denominations that allow openly gay priests, that's hardly a litmus tests either. Christianity comes in all kinds of flavors.