There is an interesting debate going on in St. Petersburg where mayoral candidate Bill Foster is being attacked for his belief in creationism. As Florida’s fourth-largest city, St. Petersburg has tried to attract businesses and industry. His critics claim that high-tech companies are going to get the wrong impression if the Mayor believes that the Earth was created in six days and that man walked with dinosaurs.
Foster once objected to his son being taught evolution in school. Pinellas School Board wanted teaching about alternatives to the theory of evolution, such as the Genesis account and repeated the ridiculous claims that Darwin contributed to the rise of Hitler and the Columbine massacre. We have seen this attack on Darwin by people like Ben Stein and others recently.
Foster, a member of Starkey Road Baptist Church in Seminole, has not backed down from his views during this debate. He insists that Genesis says that the Earth was created in six days and that this is literally true. He argues that man and dinosaurs clearly existed together despite the fact that there is a 60 million year gap between the two species. His proof is that “[d]inosaurs are mentioned in Job, so I don’t have any problem believing that dinosaurs roamed the earth.” Job refers to a “behemoth.”
Foster asks a legitimate question: “How does my knowledge of scientific theory impact my ability to rationally govern the city of St. Petersburg? It’s completely irrelevant.”
When do the radical personal views of a politician become relevant? We have seen Obama, Clinton, and other politicians routinely use their religious views as part of their campaigns. If it is appropriate to use religious views as a positive element in a campaign, it opens the door for its use as a negative element. It is not clear, however, that Foster has used his religious views as part of his campaign. For a prior column, click here.
Foster’s extreme views on education and Darwin may be a concern for citizens given the influence of a mayor on school board policies and candidates. Moreover, do extremist views indicate something about a candidate’s intellect or judgment? Would it be appropriate for a voter to oppose a candidate who belonged to a cult or a controversial faith? What do you think?
For the full story, click here.
Slickone, you do not even know what the definition of being bipolar is!
Share with me the cogency of Fosters(?) position as it relates to “all” those being disqualified from holding public office due to the value system of Foster?, because they believe in creationism…
billy,
By the way, I think the guy should become mayor if he is elected, and I am a staunchly irreligious man.
lil billy,
I think he is:
A)passive aggressive; or
B)drunk; or
C)bi-polar; or
D)all of the above.
I don’t think lil billy is smoking weed as that would take too much energy.
So I vote for A or B. Based upon hi presentation I say A.
In a class at Cal in undergrad logic this would not merit a “C”.
I have read your reasons. They are vapid and beyond the pale of reasonable analysis. Rethink your position on Foster(?), does he speak on behalf of all those who subscribe to creationism, or is he merely sharing his own ignorance and value system with those willing to listen?
Federal LLEO, being Bipolar, has nothing to do with what I am discussing here or my prior assessments. Refer to DSM-4 regarding the diagnosis and diagnostic features of this pathology..
Billy,
raff is dead on.
Cogent arguments have been provided which you have failed to refute in a cogent fashion. That you don’t find us credible is of no significance if you can’t prove our arguments false other than attacking the messenger (weak tactic) and claiming bias yet showing no evidence.
It appears to be you operating off of “feelings” instead of logic.
Proceed rafflaw….
Billy are you bi-polar or just havin’ a bad day? Please be consistent with your posts. Thanks.
Quote:
billy 1, September 19, 2009 at 3:45 pm
My apologies to all, JT, Federal LLEO, Mespo and Buddha and all those I have offended. I was quite uncharitable to you gentlemen, have a super saturday and enjoy the football..
billy 1, September 19, 2009 at 3:56 pm
JT’s got the best law blog goin’. Great group of thinkers. …
[Today a few minutes ago]
billy 1, September 20, 2009 at 7:42 pm
I pooh-pooh most of what I have read on this blog, it is based on “sensationalism” and the views of a handful of “unqualified” thinkers who are “horribly” biased. Not only biased, but miserably misinformed in there presentation of “pseudo-history” and philosophy that has been “churned” into a soup of absolute mumbo-jumbo…
End Quote
Lets start with an experiential and phenomenological approach to discussing religion as it relates to this topic.
Tell me why, and all those reading this blog, why a person should be disqualified from holding public office, because they subscribe to “creationism”……
I have know doubt you are qualified thinkers, show me……..
Present me with “information” worthy of thought provoking analysis, not based on your “feelings”. I want to know what you are thinking, you are letting me know what you are “feeling”. Share with me philosophical reasons, based on logic and reason, that are compelling enough for me to respond to! The fact that Foster(?), went on a RANT about Hitler, somehow invalidates a person from holding public office, because they subscribe to creationism? Is that your best shot????????????
billy,
If the rest of us here are “unqualified thinkers” and “biased” why waste your valuable time here. Your comments do not use any facts to respond to posters, but merely attempt to claim that your opposition is “miserably misinformed”. Your responses seem to indicate that maybe you are the one who is unqualified.
Gyges:
If you dont like my post then tell me why not, I dont feel like having a one sided argument with myself.
Tom:
I saw 1 possible racist sign “Long Legged Mack Daddy” and a confederate flag which could or could not be construed as racism. The poor whites of the deep south who fought in the “war of northern aggression” were almost as helpless as the slaves were against the tyranny of southern aristocratic society.
The other signs were against socialism and big government. One guy was a birther and even I think they may have a less than sterling agenda. Some of them may indeed be racist. But I don’t think all are. I have asked an individual that attended for the permission to post some of the pictures that he has on his site. and will post later if he lets me.
I pooh-pooh most of what I have read on this blog, it is based on “sensationalism” and the views of a handful of “unqualified” thinkers who are “horribly” biased. Not only biased, but miserably misinformed in there presentation of “pseudo-history” and philosophy that has been “churned” into a soup of absolute mumbo-jumbo…
Byron,
Saying somebody is an unqualified idiot isn’t the same as saying they can’t run for office. Especially when it’s in the context of a discussion about can the be a good mayor? Even more so when the question is being asked because they’re already running for Mayor.
And it still does not answer my question…