Presidential Candidates Debate

Both the Democratic and now the Republican presidential wannabes have had their first major debate, if you can call it that. I think it was more like a mass sound bite collection which didn't really shed much light on any of the candidates.

I have to say, though, that the most stunning comments came during discussion of - of all things - whether or not the candidates believed in Charles Darwin's theory of evolution (which, I remind you, is widely accepted by scientists and supported by bountiful evidence). Not missing an opportunity to pander to the fundamentalist Christian base, most of the candidates fell over themselves to put light between themselves and Darwin by endorsing the pseudoscientific "theory" of creationism. The most amazing comment can be credited to Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, who said, "I'm not planning on writing the curriculum for an eighth-grade science book. I'm asking for the opportunity to be president of the United States."

Indeed. If the purpose of these alleged debates is to help the voters form a picture of what the candidates are like and what policies they would follow as president, this is a revealing snapshot.

Religious beliefs of themselves are not bad things. They provide a framework for understanding our place in the universe, a comfort in hard times, and a moral compass for guiding our relationships with others. But when they stray into areas which are, frankly, unsupportable by science and dependent totally on faith, there's a problem. People who support creationism believe that God created the world exactly as described in the Bible: in six days, roughly six thousand years ago. They ignore vast evidence that evolution played a role in the development of life. Muslims believe that Mohammed flew to heaven on a white horse. Of course, winged white horses are in as short supply today as they were in the year 632, when Mohammed died, but faith is a wonderful thing that helps avoid such annoying facts.

Yes, the issue is that Mr Huckabee wants to be president, not write school textbooks. To the extent that his religious beliefs make him an honest and moral person, they are important and worthy of note. But to the extent that they reveal him to be a man who takes myth on faith as absolute truth, we must question the analytical skills he would bring to solving the many problems facing the nation.

And at this difficult and dangerous time in our history, I don't think we can afford to elect anyone who is not a clear and unbiased thinker and sifter of evidence to be our president.

Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.

Bilbo