This is How Everyone Should React When a Politician Admits He Doesn’t Accept Evolution

In the United States, when a politician refuses to admit he accepts evolution, he’s still considered a plausible candidate for President.

In Canada, when a politician doubts evolution, he’s laughed off the public stage:

An Ontario Tory’s statement that he doesn’t believe in evolution has puzzled and frustrated his fellow Conservatives who admitted Wednesday that stance doesn’t help a party trying to rebuild after four consecutive election defeats.

Progressive Conservative Rick Nicholls raised eyebrows in the legislature Tuesday when he responded to a Liberal taunt by saying opting out of teaching students evolution “was not a bad idea.”

Interim PC leader Jim Wilson insisted Nicholls’s views on evolution were not representative of Ontario Tories, and admitted the outburst “obviously didn’t help” a party in the midst of a leadership race.

“He’s entitled to his opinion, but it’s not shared by the majority of caucus members that I know of,” said Wilson. “It’s the first I’ve ever heard of it actually.”

I’m just shocked by the reaction… not because I know much about Canadian politics, but because Nicholls’ party colleagues rushed to distance themselves from his remarks. They saw his anti-science rhetoric as something that could harm their party.

Meanwhile, ignoring settled science is essentially part of the GOP platform these days.

Original article

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Evolution, Government, Religion. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to This is How Everyone Should React When a Politician Admits He Doesn’t Accept Evolution

  1. Tim says:

    If you want to read a fair response to politicians being asked about evolution check this out:
    http://thefederalist.com/2015/02/13/here-are-the-science-questions-reporters-should-ask-politicians/.

    It is written by a non-creationist, but it nails the point home that it matters very little a politician’s stance on evolution when there are much more pressing issues that liberals also disagree with “settled science” about. It is hypocritical for liberal to call out conservatives about evolution when they themselves disagree with a majority of “settled science”.

    I put “settled science” in quotes because whenever we call any science settled we’ve now ruined it.

  2. tildeb says:

    If anyone is interested, this distancing is not a shocking event in Canada.

    Let me explain.

    The reason why these provincial politicians immediately distanced themselves from this incredibly stupid utterance (for those readers who are not Canadian and have no reason to know) was because the last time the Conservatives headed into an election with a 20 point lead, their then leader (and now mayor of Toronto) advocated for public funding of other religious schools (education is a provincial matter) than the Public/Catholic one (this religious exception is an historical hangover we’re still trying to cope with in our founding documents and laws). They lost the election six weeks later not just badly but in an unprecedented political disaster centered around this single issue of religious funding by the public purse.

    Why did this happen?

    Well, as shocking as it may be to some, Canadians are not Americans.

    Canadians – especially in Ontario where this bone-headed comment was made – live and work and go to school in a multicultural, multi-linguistic, multi-ethnic, multi-relgiious, multi-gendered society. In most countries, such profound differences throughout the population would be impetus for local pockets of tribalism and produce cause for civil unrest. Not so in Canada (with a few exceptions) because, although we can self-identify with whatever shades of differences we wish (yes, the calendar is filled with celebration events that highlight these differences), what we hold in common is dear. We’ve been through the same kinds of problems other diverse populations go through and we’ve come out the other side successfully with a peaceful, prosperous, and stable nation built on these differences. The Canadian road to social success and nation building with a multifaceted society is paved by learning to uphold common values in law. No one – foreign or domestic – threatens this hard-fought, hard-won unity built on respecting diversity.

    In politico-speech, these common values are set down in our founding documents as ‘Peace, order, and good government.’ In practical terms, these values translate into a social model where legislation and funding is to be directed to the social well-being of all rather than the partisan privileging of the few. Although the toxic effects of partisanship so prevalent in American society seeps into every nook and cranny of Canadian politics, the Canadian population as a whole understands all too well that this cannot be tolerated and still maintain peace, order, and good governance. We are all too different from each other to focus on these. Our focus has to be on all.

    The population – including immigrants from many countries that have experienced social privileging and the ongoing trouble this causes to the old state as a whole – knows full well what happens when a ruling party helps to privilege some for temporary political gain. And an ongoing divisive social force is religion when privileged in the public domain. Inevitably, such privileging harms some. And this does not lead to peace, order, and good government. Anyone who thinks it does will not go far in Canadian politics.

    The Canadian population is not against religion and very often bends over so far to accommodate religious differences that we insert our collective head up our collective ass that ends up threatening common values. The creation of provincial Human Rights Commissions and resulting anti-Canadian rulings and counter lawsuits are evidence of this foolishness. Every generation seems to have to relearn this lesson. Religion is fine… in the private domain that doesn’t harm individual rights and freedoms and our shared common values. But as soon as a local government tries to privilege religion with public money and the best of intentions, the Canadian public reacts with a disapproving vehemence and slap down unrivaled in the Western world not because its anti-religious but because privileging religious belief through public funding threatens common values (respect for science, hockey, individual rights, political freedom, social stability, mutual respect, and, of course, hockey). And this is what most politicians – including the provincial Conservatives who don’t have their heads up their asses – already know. A forty point slide in six weeks is the kind of unrivaled political disaster that tends to be seared into the minds of people who must be elected. That’s why they are honestly surprised that one of their members could be so obtuse and oblivious to the reality of the political landscape and say something so incredibly stupid… because we know that reality doesn’t power those anti-science, anti-evolution opinions: religion does. And we have a long and bloody history that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that religion in the public domain is an ongoing threat to peace, order, and good government and will not be tolerated. The Conservatives will now spend a lot of time and money and effort trying to help us collectively forget that such a member could poke the hornet’s nest of public opinion with such silly and Americanized religious nonsense.

    • tildeb,

      Your usual fecal blizzard has nothing whatsoever to do with the point of the post, as usual.

      If you had the slightest understanding of political philosophy you would know that term used to describe the offending Canadian politician, “progressive conservative,” is oxymoron.

      Conservative is conservative precisely because it rejects progressivism which is really nothing more than European fascism with a trendy name.

      Atheists love fascism as you so verbosely prove over and over again.

  3. If politicians can be disqualified for their stance on evolution, why not also disqualify them for their advocacy of the abortion genocide?

    The Left, led by atheists, will now try to bamboozle the “low information voter” into focusing on the irrelevant through the logical fallacy, appeal to emotion.

    Watch, in the months to come, as GOP Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, a proven antidote to Democrat Party tyranny and dirty tricks, dismantles the atheists-leftist national propaganda machine the way he did it in his home state.

    In an frontal assault on democracy, the atheist-leftist Democrat Party fascists forced Scott Walker to win 3 elections where only one was required.

    They went after him and his family in a rampage whose objective was total personal and professional annihilation.

What you think about this?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s