That was until i see him denounce evolution as "a theory".
See, Ron Paul is a christian, And like most cristians he is happy to disbelieve in science and justify it by claiming it offers no proof, And then favour an alternative "theory" that happens to offer no proof and no evidence at all, Like creationism.
If evidence and proof is so important to the religious, Why are they so willing to stake everything in an idea that offers neither? Their demands for "evidence" is simply an excuse to deny the existence of something that proves biblical creation wrong. They are dishonest, Intellectually retarded cowards. To them it's not about being right, It's just about finding excuses to justify a belief in something that is patently untrue.
Ron Paul is nothing but another "science is wrong, God done it" idiot.
What's scarier is that the theory of evolution should be compared to creationism since the first is in the realm of science and second is in the realm of religion. Let's not make of our sciences our religion. Paul's solution is simple, keep federal bureaucrats out of the pointless debate, remove their unconstitutional power over schools and let parents decide what is the best way to educate their children. Radical idea isn't it? My question to you is, did Paul "denounce" the theory of evolution?
ReplyDelete"I used to have a lot of respect for Ron Paul, He seemed like the only presidential candidate able to drag America out of the global mess they have found themselves in."
ReplyDeleteAs I'm not from the States, I don't know about your particular political issues. However, if Ron Paul had ideas that made sense re: “fixing” whatever it is that you think is wrong with America, before you found out he is a moron, why won’t those ideas still work? I mean, maybe we’re all geniuses in some areas and morons in other areas. Sure you’re disappointed to find out he disagrees with you on how we came to be, but now that we’re here . . .
Or are you saying that because he is so wrong on how life came about that he is probably way wrong on his economic issues as well? In which case, does that make both of you morons for believing something so stupid.
Sorry, but any scientist worth his salt will tell you evolution IS a theory. Not sacred text. A remarkably well functioning hypothesis. But not unshakable fact. Look at Darwinism as the best guess so far. Ron Paul understands this. Bashing RP for stating the obvious is actually rather backward. Look at the paradigms being challenged about the expanding earth vs plate tectonics. Or the new theories of the electrical nature of the universe. In science there are only working solutions. Temporary and subject to amendment.
ReplyDelete"Sorry, but any scientist worth his salt will tell you evolution IS a theory. Not sacred text. A remarkably well functioning hypothesis. But not unshakable fact. Look at Darwinism as the best guess so far. Ron Paul understands this. Bashing RP for stating the obvious is actually rather backward. Look at the paradigms being challenged about the expanding earth vs plate tectonics. Or the new theories of the electrical nature of the universe. In science there are only working solutions. Temporary and subject to amendment."
ReplyDeleteFirst, do you understand what 'theory' means in scientific language? It's an explanation while a law is a description.
All the morons saying 'evolution is just a theory' need to find the meaning of theory in science language
If there are only "Temporary and subject to amendment" solutions will you deny gravity because of this?
Your post makes no sense at all
"if Ron Paul had ideas that made sense re: “fixing” whatever it is that you think is wrong with America, before you found out he is a moron, why won’t those ideas still work?"
ReplyDeleteI'm sure the ideas he has said he will implement would still work. But in the light of this i am worried about future ideas he may have.
For a grown man to believe the invisible man in the sky is responsible for something when science offers a testable alternative that has mountains of evidence to support it is ridiculous, And when that man is potentially the next leader of the most powerful nation on the planet, it becomes terrifying.
Gravity is an observable phenomenon,like bio-diversity. The methods mechanisms and or other means by which they occur is a guesstimate at =} best.
ReplyDeleteI watched that video and it seems that you brought up creationism, not him. He seemed to dwell on the idea that it's a ridiculous topic for the president since that role in government shouldn't have any involvement in the evolution.
ReplyDeleteHis answer does seem to focus on the creationism/evolution/origin crap discussion being thrown at the candidates lately. Maybe you missed how specifically he was answering the question.
"should it be true or should it be false?"
Could someone figure out what the guy's entire question was?
The worst part about Paul is he is a doctor or was a doctor. Ok, I know he was educated in the early 60's and DNA was very new especially with respect to its relationship to evolution, however, because there is staggering evidence that supports evolution and zero evidence that refutes or even challenges evolution, one has to wonder about Paul's judgment when it comes to evidence that could be up against his faith....in other words, he should not have the power of VETO.
ReplyDeletePerhaps Ron Paul is blissfully unaware of the issues that have arisen in PA, KS and FLA over evolution v creationism in the last several years. Or perhaps he ignores them on the basis that he sees them as states' rights issues. At any rate, I would think he would keep himself informed. Nationally, we are a laughingstock to the world over this matter.
ReplyDeleteHe could be, if elected, in the position of seating another Supreme, and the thought of him making that decision is chilling.
The thought of having someone who discounts proven science making most of the myriad of presidential decisions is alarming. I agree with Beaj- how can such a person's judgement be trusted?
I don't believe in creationism, however i do not diminish, or look down upon those that do.
ReplyDeleteI guess i have compassion, since even my scientific understanding is based on beliefs - albeit more observable, repeatable or predictive than religious beliefs. In the end, all beliefs are like boats that float on the vast undefinable sea of reality.
We feel comfortable in our boats and its very rare that we have the courage or the capacity to step off of our boat - its called being human - we are made of our beliefs.
I'm not in Ron's boat of creationism or global warming, but i'm right with him, where it matters, in the constitution! For me it is not an ancient document. It was light years ahead of its time and insures that i can pursue or develop whatever beliefs i want - and Ron or you can simultaneously pursue whatever ones you want.
So long as the pursuit of your beliefs does not impinge upon my pursuit and visa-vera, then we're likely to expressing our "enlightened self interests" and thats called being an American!
Ron Paul says: The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion.
ReplyDeleteSo not only does Paul not support SOCAS, but he gets it wrong about the content of the founding documents, which are NOT replete with references to God. And the Founders privately expressed their concerns about and at times aversion to Christianity.
Additionally, Paul has introduced legislation in an attempt to declare life begins at conception, and seeks to overturn RoevWade, and outlaw abortion.
Do a little research and blog hopping. You'll find that Paul is a right-winger who'll sing his song to anyone from white supremacists to armageddonists.
Yes Karen you raise a good point. I think many of the founders were more into free masonry than christianity anyways.
ReplyDeleteSo i think Ron may be a bit off - i would like to hear Ron defend himself personally on this one. When i have seen him do that before he always brings it back to the constitution - he might say something like - the people within the government can "talk" about religion all they like, so long as they don't pass laws that impose their beliefs upon you.
As far as RoevWade, yes Ron would reverse that. However he would let the states have the final say on how to deal with abortions - not the Federal Government.
Ron Paul's belief or disbelief in evolution has nothing to do with whether or not he is qualified to be President. Especially from a libertarian or antiwar perspective, it seems odd to suddenly oppose him for this reason. He would not seek to impose his views on anyone on the issue as he does not believe the federal government should be involved in education at all. In fact, if Ron Paul were elected, it would be the greatest step to a return to limited, constitutional government. Just recently the US House voted for the
ReplyDeleteSAFE Act a clear threat to Internet freedom, and Paul was one of only two congressmen to vote against it (no Democrat did).
If you're so worried about what Paul would do in office, I have to ask, why? He has stated his views repeatedly and has the most consistent voting record in Congress to prove it. He is an honest man, and the statement They are dishonest, Intellectually retarded cowards. seems more appropriately applied to politicians than to anyone else. Ron Paul is different. He really believes in limiting government power, most importantly federal power. I couldn't care less what his religious views are, not when every other Democrat and Republican candidate for president believes in giving more power to Washington to run and control our lives.
BEAJ said...
he should not have the power of VETO.
If you mean the Presidential veto power, I can't think of anyone else who should have it. Ron Paul would veto all unnecessary and unconstitutional legislation passed by the power hungry, tax and spend Democrats and Republicans.
karen said...
He could be, if elected, in the position of seating another Supreme, and the thought of him making that decision is chilling.
The thought of having someone who discounts proven science making most of the myriad of presidential decisions is alarming. I agree with Beaj- how can such a person's judgement be trusted?
But the thought of any of the other candidates running choosing Justices is not chilling? Please explain. I'll tell you whose judgment I don't trust, the judgment of those who voted for and continue to support the Iraq quagmire, the judgment of those who believe even more power should be concentrated in Washington, the judgment of those who vote for things like the Patriot Act. Do I have to go on?
Do I agree with Paul on evolution? No. But he would not allow anyone in Washington to have control over that question, so what's the problem. Of the all arguments against Ron Paul, those mentioned here have got to be the lamest yet.
Sean it's got very little to do with how his creationist views will effect his presidency or if he will force these views on other people... But it has a lot to do with the mentality, Logic and intelligence of someone running to be the president of the most powerful nation on the planet.
ReplyDeleteHow can you trust someone to run a country when they flat out publicly reject science in favour of invisible friends and mythology?
Matt, it's not that I don't understand your point. I too am always stunned at the way people can ignore the clear evidence of natural history and favor a ridiculous myth like the Genesis creation story instead. I just don't think, as you seem to, that it's very relevant to a person's judgment in other areas. People have a way of separating their weird, unfounded beliefs from the rest of their lives (at least in many cases). Believing in the strange doctrines of Mormonism, for example, doesn't prevent Mormons from running businesses logically and being successful. I just happen to think that Ron Paul has proven himself of good judgment on the role of the federal government and constitutional issues, and that if he believes in creationism, while I wish it wasn't so, I don't see any evidence that it has affected his ability to clearly and rightly make decisions as a public office holder.
ReplyDeleteI'm an atheist, hell I'm even on Dawkins' website, but I still support Ron Paul. I admit it does pain me to see him say "it's just a theory" and he rejects it. But he runs on a platform of fairness, because of his strong beliefs in equal rights and the Constitution and he's very consistent on that. He also cares about my number 1 and most important issue,the economy, and is willing to speak radical truths that are ignored or unvoiced by mainstream politicos. The man makes sense in so many different ways that for me, to withdrawal support because of his creationist views makes me the moron. He is the best candidate on both sides.
ReplyDeleteIt becomes terrifying that someone who believes existence is a spiritual fact rather than it was all created from a big bang? How did thte big bang come about, I wonder. Because if we had nothing, it is the simplest use of logic and reason to deduce that from nothing can come nothing. The fact of existence is a contradiction to reason, so don't imagine that atheism is based on solid logical ground.
ReplyDeleteAnd as for terrifying, I'd say it's alot scarier that the current President is a member of a society like Skull & Bones, into which he was inititated while lying naked in a coffin. As was John kerry. Now there's reason to womder wtf is going on.
Andrew, your God must have been created from nothing, but that is besides the point. Evolution isn't about the Big Bang, it is about a concrete theory of how life changed over time on this planet.
ReplyDeleteTo deny that, is to be a moron, especially when one has looked at and/or have a more than basic understanding of the data, like a medical doctor would be expected to have.
"And when that man is potentially the next leader of the most powerful nation on the planet, it becomes terrifying."
ReplyDeleteYou num-nut.. He believes in small government. One that won't intrude into peoples lives. If that's the case, than let him believe in scientology, if his policies go through than there won't be anyone forcing religious beliefs on schools. That's why he said it was such a silly question to ask.
Duuuuummmmmmmbb
It's nothing to do with him intruding on peoples lives. It's a concern regarding his ability to make decision and think rationally.
ReplyDeleteI would love to use the occasion to complain about the lack of having Judaism or in specific Zionism on the TAG LIST on the right of this blog.
ReplyDeletePls could you write something about that here, being an Atheist as you say you are, that would be fare wouldn´t it?
Have a great day :-)
I believe that you guys are exagerating on Ron Pauls beliefs. If you had been watching the video you would see that he simply doesnt accept it because of his religious beliefs. He isnt "Against science" as you all say. He is also obviously for technological advancements especialy for his field of work as a doctor, you should see his voting records. He also said it there in the video if he changed to believed in evolution it wouldnt change his life. He is fighting for real issues in this country but all you guys can do is mudsling (like he said he wouldnt be running for office if that was the only issue). And dont think im just another 'religious nut' im atheist and pro evolution but I have respect for personal beliefs and the first amendment.
ReplyDeleteRejecting the theory that humans directly derive from apes is not anti-science. Actually, rejecting a theory is one of the driving forces in science. Make up your mind. Analyze his answer closely, don't just project your reactive thoughts. "Humans are alien/ape hybrids", "God made us out of mud, 10k years ago", "We evolved. From one cell to this mess." - Just look around you. Pretty much everyone believes that the universe and all reality was created. If we agree that anything exists, we agree that it was created. How is that anti-science? And how does that relate to Creationism.
ReplyDeleteanonymous, He said "the creator". He is obviously talking about an entity, A god. That makes it creationism.
ReplyDeleteI do not understand why anyone is worrying about whether or not Ron Paul personally believes in the theory of evolution or not. To lose respect over something so trivial and insignificant is silly. Ron Paul is the only presidential candidate that is standing up for the american people. In school, evolution is taught, not creationism, so all of you out there that are upset, stop.
ReplyDeletePeople lose respect for him because they don't see any difference between someone saying "goddidit" than saying "elves did it". wouldn't you lose respect for a presidential candidate if he believes elves were responsible for creating humans?
ReplyDeleteUmm, this seems to act as a ad hominem attack. He IS a libertarian. He is a against the federal involved in education. Sure he is a Christian, and a creationist... will that have any bearing if the country falls into an economic tail spin, and people "hold on to their guns and religion" even more.
ReplyDeleteNow we have McCain and Palin to worry about.
"Libertarianism" is just as dependent on ignoring obvious facts as creationism. Ron Paul is a moron, as this speech confirms.
ReplyDeleteIt is not that Ron Paul believes in creationism which he has not said. He is a trained MD. It is the fact that he like all politicians lie to get a constituency. I will never vote for a man who for the sake of votes goes against his own beliefs.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Makarios. If you agree with Ron Paul on key issues, what does his personal belief matter? It just seems unfair to judge a man because of his religion. What if Obama were Muslim? But wait, he's Christian so yay, that's better. But what if he were Buddhist? Hindu? If he believed in reincarnation would that suddenly deem him unworthy for such a high office? Surely his judgement must be off because he believes in God.
ReplyDeleteThis just seems so hypocritical. Atheism is a choice and so is choosing to believe in God. You can't say Atheists have no morality and the religious have no sense.
No, I'm not Christian or a hardcore Ron Paul fan. I just don't think people should trash the man because he happens to believe in Creationism or that it should affect his credibility.
Ron Paul is a Dr...even as a Democrat I would've voted for him if he got the Republican ticket. That being said..he's a Dr. he's not dumb enough to believe in creationism. even as the virtuous and honest man i think he is, he knew he would have to lie about his beliefs and/or religion to have a shot at winning the REPUBLICAN nomination. this isn't a big lie though, religion doesn't matter when it comes to government. Republicans just want people they can relate to; remember, that's the party that flocked out in the masses to vote for a guy for PRESIDENT because they thought "hey, i could TOTALLY see myself drinking a beer with this guy!" Even still, if Ron Paul HAD gotten the Republican ticket, even as a pretty stiff (not straight-ticket) Democrat, I definitely could've seen myself voting Republican (sans Sarah Palin, obviously). All I'm saying is, don't let his opinion (even if it's wrong) on how we came to be keep you from supporting him. I know his chance has past and I'm sure Barack will do some good things and some bad things, just like all politicans, but just because I don't agree with Barack's stance on gun control doesn't mean I'm not going to vote for him because of paramount issues (economy, international relations, etc.). I couldn't care less if my politican thought we migrated here from Mars in the year 1923 if he REALLY had an idea what he was talking about, and REALLY cared for the American people.
ReplyDeleteWanna talk? Add me at www.myspace.com/flylike1
Evolution is, in fact, a theory. However, it is a scientific theory and subject to proof and peer review and everything else that makes it freaking science. The layman's term theory and scientific theory are two different things. Gravity is a theory for dog's sake! It doesn't mean that it's not real!
ReplyDeleteRon Paul is a dumbass. He is nothing more than a Republican dirtbag. Evolution may not be how we got here but, god sure as hell did not just "wave a magic wand" and shit suddenly appeared. He would not even make a good bag of meat much less a good choice for the country
ReplyDeleteeven though he is a christian and a creationsit that doesnt mean he is a bad politician
ReplyDeleteThe problem is a matter of bad vocabulary. People hear theory and think hypothesis. Here's why I an Anti-Theist Canadian who (usually) supports the Democrats would vote for Ron Paul.
ReplyDelete1) from that video we can gather that he doesn't intend to attack evolution in the classroom.
2) For him to get support of his republican CRISTIAN base he needs to say he is a creationist just like EVERY president must be Cristian.
3) Ron Paul is for the death of the Federal Reserve. Possibly thee most corrupting influence in American economics
Did I miss something here? Paul didn't mention Creationism. I neither believe in Creationism nor Evolution but I have yet to find any information from Paul to say he is a Creationist.
ReplyDelete