A funny thing happened at last week's debate between candidates for the Republican party nomination. When asked for a show of hands on who did not believe in evolution, Mitt Romney abstained and kept his paws on the podium. In other words, he signified that he did believe in Charles Darwin's elegant description of the origin of species.
Well, it is no secret that Romney has been courting Christian conservatives. This past weekend he gave the commencement address at Pat Robertson's Regent University. It's quite a balancing act, really, considering that Robertson's own Christian Brodcasting Network has declared Mormonism a cult.
The candidate and his Christian supporters have been working hard to overcome Evangelical antipathy toward the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, whose 19th-century founder, Joseph Smith, said he revised parts of the Bible to correct it.But his statuesque demeanor at the debate regarding his views on evolution have caused some evangelicals to seek further clarification on where the candidate stands on the matter of the earth really being only 6,000 years old. In response, Romney's campaign has released a statement:
"Governor Romney believes both science and faith can help inform us about the origins of life in this world."It's classic Romney. Vague, wishy-washy, and will further the perception that he is constitutionally incapable of taking a stand on a controversial issue and sticking to it. The question for the former governor is, what happens when science seems to contradict a matter of faith, as in the case of the age of our planet? Furthermore, how do we decide who is right when two faiths disagree on bedrock cosmological questions? Your evangelical constituents want to know, Mr. Romney.
Reader Comments ( Page 4 of 14)
46. The truth is there is no transitional form that can be pointed to as the step between man and ape. All fossils that have been recovered which alleged to be just that were hoaxes or merely the skeleton of an man with some ape like features or vice versa. This doesn't prove anything accept that fact that some people today (unfortunately) have ape like features.
Chris at 5:57PM on May 8th 2007
47. Thank you for proving my point BHS, you know why you would choose them, because those are observable phenomena. By the very nature of evolution (occurs over millions of years) and creation (20,000 years ago) we can't observe and therefore can't say definatively that either one is scientific truth. If you are trying to point out that religion sometimes gets things wrong, I would completely agree, but so do scientists
Chris at 5:55PM on May 8th 2007
48. Nestea,
You are operating under the assumption that the Bible is incredibly false. You are incorrect. Chris makes a good point that we all must heed: nobody will prove their side. My aim is to show you that you can't prove that God does not exist, and there IS another side of the story. I'm telling you, God created the earth and humans. So, go ahead and tell me that the earth is 6 billion years old and we evolved from apes. Then, we will part our ways not having accomplished anything. If you are not willing to even entertain the idea that God exists, then you are beginning with a hardened heart, and you will not go far. I apologize if I came off as disrespectful to anyone. Thanks for listening!
Adam at 5:57PM on May 8th 2007
49. Adam,
Did you give Mohammed a chance? Have you given Confucious a chance? Would you give the Dalai Lama a chance? Are they wrong and you're right? Is Jesus the son of God and everyone else is wrong to think otherwise? Are you right and the 4/5ths of the world that don't believe in Christianity wrong?
As others have mentioned, the basic point of this article is that most of us would prefer to have an educated, open-minded, clear-thinking president who can stand tall in the world. It would be a refreshing change for us.
Good night and good luck!
BHS at 6:01PM on May 8th 2007
50. I watched the debate.I can't remember if he said who doesn't beliieve in evolution or who beliives in it.I thought I saw Romney's hand go up.You couldn't really tell because the camera went to the side veiw.I would doubt Romney believes in evolution as we think of it Coming from a fish or something then on down to an ape.Well a tree is a tree is a tree..a flower is a flower is a flower..an animal is an animal is an animal.A human is a human is a human.We don't grown tree branches. Evolution is stupid.
Sue Price at 1:08PM on May 9th 2007
51. BHS,
I believe we've all sinned against God. Who can say they've kept the 10 commandements their entire lives? No one can. Only Jesus was the perfect sacrifice that atoned for my sins, and reconciled me to God. And He can reconcile you to God, too, if you put your trust in him and repent of your sins. Mohammad and the rest of them were religious leaders, not God on earth. Let your heart be the judge. You will stand in front of God when you die, and what will you tell him? If you are judged based on His law, the 10 commandments, will you be innocent or guilty? My friend, your punishment was laid upon Jesus (not Buddha) and if you trust in Him and repent from your sins, you can enter the presence of a perfect God.
Adam at 6:16PM on May 8th 2007
52. Of course Romney will "evolve." He is evolving into GW Bush before our very eyes. The Bush family supports Romney and he will say and do whatever they and the rest of the Neocons want him to do and say.
Lynne at 6:42PM on May 8th 2007
53. I think that most people miss the entire point. It's not evolution versus creation or creation versus evolution, it's evolution--not as we think we understand it--as a tool of creation. How can we even pretend to know the mind of God...how he works??? Look at the evidence. If Earth really is six thousand years old--and it's possible--the compelling question should be, "How long were those years"?
W.L. Barton at 6:36PM on May 8th 2007
54. Personally, I believe in both. I believe that God created man through evolution. It would be nice if people would stop ignoring God or stop ignoring civilized education. In relation to politics, it is clearly stated that there must be a separation between church and state and this important notion from our brilliant founding fathers must be upheld.
Birdy at 6:43PM on May 8th 2007
55. Evolution and creation are not or do not have to be at odds. God created the Earth through evolution. And we continue to evolve. Evolution does not interfere with my belief in God.
Lynne at 6:50PM on May 8th 2007
56. god is my creator ! for those who believe no answer is needed !! for those who don"t !! none possable !!!
jackie at 9:22AM on May 11th 2007
57. Who is saying that we really have to believe in god in the first place? God and the bible are all fictional, to this day no one has proved them to be real. I was raised Catholic but disagree with all of the curches teachings and beliefs. How would "god" have created gay people and then in the bible have it written that being gay is wrong. Why would god have provided us with the medical authority to provide women with the service of abortion and then say it is wrong? Evolution is a proven theory. The bible is a fictional work. Just take for example, all the paintings you see of Jesus. He is always white. Well being from the part of the world he is from, he would not have been white. There are so many ways to poke holes in the stories in the bible, that it is beyond me how people can believe it.
Jenny at 7:14PM on May 8th 2007
58. I think we need to get back on topic: By Romney abstaining from the vote of not agreeing with Evolution does not make him wishy washy...just because he's a Mormon he can't believe in Evolution? Who said that science and God can't go together..that Evolution was not a part of God's plan? I know tons of strong Christians who believe in Evolution-look at the facts..the real ones...they don't contradict. And Caleb-Thomas Jefferson referred to the "wall" of separation between church and state numerous times-look it up.
MD Rites at 7:18PM on May 8th 2007
59. My problem with the evolution/creation argument is that I have never seen a single argument for creationism that is based on observations of any sort, and I have seen many observational arguments for evolution. The best argument anyone on these pages has come up with for the validity of creationism is that we don't have any fossils of half-man/half-apes. Granted, there is a fossil regard that strongly suggests a gradual transition from ape to man, but apparently some people will only be satisfied by big foot himself. I have yet to see a positive, evidence-based argument for creationism that does not reference the Bible. Could someone maybe make one? Or at least try?
Also, the semantics argument - evolution is just a "theory" - is ignorant to the point of insanity. As has been stated, anything in science that is based on observation can only be a theory. A good scientist will not state with 100% certainty that a ball, if dropped, will hit the ground, even if he has seen it happen a million times. Meanwhile, creationists will gladly state that God created the earth in six days six thousand years ago because it says so in a book written two thousand years ago, a book that has undergone so many selective revisions at the hands of mortals that some error inevitably must have been introduced. I appreciate faith, and I think faith should be an important part of everyone's life, but faith should not be argued as science.
JB at 12:11AM on May 9th 2007
60. I agree that Science and faith arent mutually exclusive. There are holes in both.
Steve Bonomo at 7:49PM on May 8th 2007