+1

I dont understand what the problem is if they do not believe in Evolution. How is that going to effect any kind of policy? There are a lot of reasons to not vote for them. Not believing in evolution should not be one.

These are the same people that would want to push faith based education in schools. These sort of positions matter enormously.

At the risk of being pedantic, Romney's position is what Intelligent Design implies, using an outside force to explain the observed and proven fact of evolution. This would be equivalent to claiming an outside force causes gravity as opposed to gravitons as implied by current models of the universe. Huntsman, probably Newt and possibly Paul, depending on what they meant with their statements seem to understand what the Theory of Evolution actually implies, but the rest seem to be just denying facts.

This matters immensely, denying evolution shows they refute science and progress. If a candidate isn't smart enough to correctly analyze the data on something as simple and with as much of a scientific consensus as evolution, how are we supposed to trust them with any of the more complicated issues that presidents deal with daily?

If god(s) do not exist then you must do so say or reveal logic to prove your beliefs. Until then I will continue to believe that there must be something that created everything, because there is no logical conclusion to draw from science to bring forth a counter proof to move my motivation of contemplation to a ratification.

So let me get this straight. I have to PROVE to you with PHYSICAL EVIDENCE that there is a god. Seems to me someone who desires PROOF and PHYSICAL EVIDENCE wouldn't necessarily be on the side of the 'almighty creator'

Can God throw a football so far he can't catch it?

Yes.

God is omnipotent.

A creator is not the default answer. It's your default answer. Check yo selves.

Policy plans don't mean shit when it's some bread and circus shit meant to appease voters.

^^^ RE: #2. Uh, and you don't think someone like Bachmann would move to make research illegal? I don't think it's that far of a stretch man.

Bush didn't make it illegal and I think it is doubtful that it even could be made illegal. Either way Congress has the real power and this country is pretty evenly split when it comes to political parties.

Neither are electable.

They are just pandering to a small part of their party. Just like Obama was pretty far left when he started, all move to the center as time goes on.

I personally don't want the government funding any of this shit. Who says Stem Cells are the best thing to research? Ya know. I mean maybe something else is key, but people are ignoring it because government money is too lucrative.

Market distortions.

Holy shit, people need to get comfortable with existential ambiguity. It's awfully weak-minded to hold religion above the pursuit of truth because it provides an intellectual prozac in times of emotional and mental vulnerability.

It is immensely important in whether or not they believe in creationism! If you believe in creationism in America, usually you are Christian. Therefore it is safe to assume that these people will have very different stances on abortion, global warming, teaching science in school, stem cell research, etc. Most stances that people with religious views take is not one guided by reason, but their own faith. Or even worse, how they interpret it.

and ANT; telling people that their spouse/friend/child went to heaven or telling that dying person that does not make anything easier. If they believe they will go to heaven then they already do, but it will not change anything for them (the fact that they are dying) or people who lose them. Atheism isn't meant to comfort people, and if you perhaps don't believe in an afterlife, you just might be a little more appreciative and aware of this one.

Guided by reason? This country is guided by the mother fucking constitution and bill of rights. Last time I checked people are allowed to have any religious beliefs. You don't want the President or government telling schools what they should teach? Well me either, hence my desire for a smaller government and more liberty.

Or it will put more people out of work.

You don't think strong is the right word? Most of the people who believe in evolution know very little about it. They were taught the basics in science class and because it is science they roll with it.

If you think that the government setting wages is a good idea, you are nuts. People blow off minimum wage jobs all the time. Do you think they would even bother if wages dropped to 3 bucks an hour? Get real. Wages are set by people who are willing to do them.

The entire argument you hear from the left supporting illegal immigration is that they do jobs Americans wont. McDonalds would pay 7 bucks an hour with our without the government interfering.

How people can complain about the government forcing religion in schools, fighting wars in 3 countries and the patriot act, but at the same time want government to set prices, teach only evolution and fund stem cell research is beyond me.

More government means more good if you believe one thing or more bad if you believe another. How about we just live and let live and shrink this fucking beast so we wont have to complain about it interfering anymore.

I didn't mean the chortling cunt comment at you BTW.

Science is great. Finding the truth is great. I support and encourage it all. But to shit on religion or religious people, without seeing the good within it is awfully closed minded.

The theory of evolution will change and adapt as more information is uncovered. The majority of people who believe in it and look down on creationism couldn't explain evolution past "we came from monkeys". If you want to believe in evolution ,fine, but actually learn the details about it. Otherwise you are just believe what someone else tells you which is basically the same thing as believe in a creator.

The only issue I have with religion is that you guys throw out or forget the hundreds of crazy things said in the bible and cherry pick the ideas that could still apply or be believable in a modern context. As society progresses, more and more of the shit said in the Bible is going out of fashion as civil liberties are expanded. You guys will fight tooth and nail to prevent that, and that is why many people hate bible humping religious conservatives.

Yeah, because Bible thumping conservatives are any less fucking annoying as big government, liberals.

You all are the same, just forcing different beliefs down peoples throat.

The government has an interest in protecting public health. Most major medical research is at least partly funded by the government. You want profit driven companies to determine what medical research deserves funding? Why would a private company fund research for diseases that are not lucrative for the company to treat?

If you don't want the government telling you who to marry, what to believe in and what to do you should want a smaller government.

But no. People just want a government that does what they want.

Dude, you know that there are tons of biotech companies looking at all kinds of rare diseases.

The government funds populace crap, not real stuff.

C'mon man, you know government funding isn't going to anything but headline illnesses.

Just looked at the numbers, the government funds 36% of medical research. It also funds about 20% of military research. Do you support the latter?

I think most citizens of the USA would prefer the government to support medical research and not research in the most efficient ways to kill people.