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.
Strange, some of the things I have read over the last two days seem to imply, quite “strongly”, that anyone who believes in God, Christianity or the value of Sacred Scripture is somehow a defective boobcatcher, who is seriously unenlightened….
“I just remember reading that a few of the books included in the “Old Testament” were from a group of writings considered something akin to the Left Behind Series.”
Gyges,
The books of Ruth, Daniel and Job fill that bill and are analogous to the Torah, as Revelations is to the Gospels.
Billy,
I don’t confuse Fundamentalist Christianity with belief in God. Nor do I boil the whole spectrum of religion down to Atheist and Christian.
For someone who’s done with this conversation, you sure have a lot to say.
Does this sound so unreasonable? Does this offend your sensibilities?
I believe in God, and I am a Catholic. I worship regularly and find it very spritually fulfilling. I believe in an “evolutionary” process, that is not completely understood scientifically. Be that as it may, I believe the earth is approximatley 2.5 to 3 billion years old. Whatever process was instituted, that led to the development and refinement of modern man, has its’ origin and genesis in God. He instituted the process of creation. He may have chosen to form things, all living organisms, slowly and inexorably, over eons of time…..
Your logic would seem to point to the “opinion” that the only logical, sensible people are atheists, who are simultaneously scientists. Tell that to Louis Pasteur, an ardent Catholic who prayed his rosary daily. Because you don’t find value in “something” dosn’t invalidate its’ essentialness or “inherent” value.
I am a scientist, I also value religion. What value is there teaching science in a religion class?
Byron,
Human history is full of people choosing to believe something when the proof points the other way. There’s a conversation going on today that proves that point.
It makes no sense to me for you to say “well this isn’t true, but I think it could be taught in school.” If you want to teach your kid an aspect of your religion that is counter to current scientific knowledge, go ahead. If you want to teach MY kid the same thing, we’ve got a problem.
Now, I realize on the surface it seems a little insincere for me to say that, and then insist that we teach my particular belief in schools. Here’s the difference, my belief has lots of proof backing it up. Theirs doesn’t.
We as a society have decided that science explains the way things work better then religious explanations (when the two are in direct conflict). So to teach children how to survive and be product citizens we teach science in schools. Creationism is NOT science. It fails several of the key criteria of scientific theory (it’s non-falsifiable for instance).
Please explain what advantage we get by teaching religion in science class?
Byron, I’m the gaa-gaa man, Boo!
billy:
“Still, I have a passion for cryptozoology”
you arent someone we all know and love are you?
Gyges:
after everyone has learned reading, writing and arithmetic you can learn whatever you want.
I probably would not want my son or daughter learning creationism because there are many other things that need to be taught first. But I have not been around religious fundamentalists and so do not have a good grasp of their views. If they want to shove creationism up my a$$ then yes I would have a problem.
I guess I so fundamentally believe in evolution that I don’t even take creationism seriously enough to think about teaching it in schools although I would not be opposed to teaching it at the Jr. or Sr. level in high school a comparative study between the 2, I think most intelligent children would opt for evolution. It seems so laughable that anyone would even believe it based on the evidence before them. It is almost like believing the moon is made of Green Cheese or that high taxes lead to prosperity (sorry Gyges I could not help myself).
Bottom line though I don’t know why Christians cant just say “hey God put it all in place and then left it alone”, I don’t see any contradiction with that. Although I have heard more than one Christian opine on what heaven looks like so that may be an epistemological impossibility for them.
Mike,
Well obviously the early histories are full of Eponyms and telescoping of events, and as you’ve said a large amount of the stories are by and large metaphors. I just remember reading that a few of the books included in the “Old Testament” were from a group of writings considered something akin to the Left Behind Series. Religious, but fictional. I just couldn’t remember which ones.
Oh well, I’ll get my Azimov back soon, I’ll check then.
“isn’t what we call “Ruth” classified by Jewish scholars as religious fiction”
Gyges,
The biggest problem with biblical history is that modern fundamentalists don’t get the metaphors that were common coin when these pages were written. The take the bible literally crowd (Christians and Jews)misunderstand the ancients use of metaphor. The truth is when it came to communication they were probably smarter than us and humankind has devolved from a higher intellectual level. The only balancing factor is the advancement of science and that brings us full circle back to the issue. Believing in the “literal” truth of most religion’s texts, omits the essence of what is being taught and is used by power hungry sociopaths as a path to power.
By the way, I have spent many vacation days in Northern California, in the area around Bluff Creek, in search of “Bigfoot”. My quest to photograph and observe this mythical creature goes back to adolescence. As I have gotten older, I have “pulled back”considerably in my search for sasquatch and focused on other things I am passionate about. Still, I have a passion for cryptozoology and the search for unknown creatures. Because of my adolescent interest that burgeoned into an adult passion, I chose to study anthro and psychology. Nothing is more fascinating or intriguing to me than the human mind and diseases of the mind…
billy,
Good, now let’s get on with the many topics at hand within this exceptional blawg.
Byron,
I just thought I’d point out that you were setting up a straw man.
We’re in agreement about not caring if the mayor is a creationist as long as he keeps it to himself. If people only voted for candidates who agreed with them 100% of the time, we’d have a lot of elections where everyone involved got one vote.
What I think you underestimate is the long term planning that has gone into getting creationists in to positions like Mayor, just so they can help influence school curriculum. I’ve attended strategy meetings about how to do just that, and I’d be willing to bet that as active as this man was for that cause, he has too. I think that
Now if you happen to think that “teaching the controversy” is o.k., then I ask shouldn’t we also teach the Biblical account of Middle Eastern history, even though parts of it are fictitious (I loaned out my copy of Azimov’s Guide to the Bible, so Mike will have to clarify, but isn’t what we call “Ruth” classified by Jewish scholars as religious fiction)? This isn’t a question of teaching two different theories with equal amounts of proof. This is a question of teaching a theory grounded in science, and one grounded in religion. I’m not o.k. with my kid getting religion in Science class. Should we teach about Chi as an alternative theory in anatomy classes?
Federal LEO, if you ever met me, you might get a better handle on my personality type. Yes, I say things that others may think are paradoxical or incongruent, no doubt. I am a person who has been all over the world, literally save Antarctica. I am a student of the human condition and sometimes scratch my head when I read posts, by men who I know are very intellectual and gifted, but make outrageous judgemnets at the “flip of a switch”. I try to be objective and listen and read thoughtfully, for days at a stretch sometimes before I respond. I generally don’t like to argue and am not terribly impressed because a person can “adroitly” argue circles around someone, with content or material that is not wholly accurate. I try to police my behavior accordingly, “life” is a work in progress and self- actualization comes from self awareness. I enjoy reading what you guys post, this is a fascinating “think tank”. I have no doubt “you” personally have positively impacted the lives of many peole in your life and personally enriched the readers of this blog with your wit and clever insight. I will continue to read and observe. Don’t get “freaked out” because I occasionally say something that is not wholly congruent with your impressions of me, or what you think a blogger on this site should sound or comport like..
Byron,
Welcome back, I’ve missed you and didn’t realize your new incarnation. Re: Communist Manifesto any document that purports to solve all of humankind’s problems with politics and economics, is not to be believed. Our problems are emotional and genetic, we use the intellectual stuff to cover up the lizard brain within.
billy,
I have a scientific background (in which I had a career) and I heard just about everything from humans–the good, bad, and the exceptionally ugly, while working as an LEO who did his best to enforce the rules, regulations, and laws as unbiasedly as humanly possible. As you know, we humans are often impossible to understand and sometimes even harder to accept change.
Others and I recognize your abilities; however, we have noted your inconsistencies, which are incongruous with your stated academic achievements and experiences. I have worked with scientists who were straight A students—including in subjects like integral calculus—who were unable to grasp common human interactions and cope with the vagaries of life, in general. Some of those persons were also among the most unethical humans I have ever encountered—a real conundrum for me that I cannot, nor will I ever, fully understand. Regardless, I learned from them and some of their accomplished research substantively benefited the scientific knowledge base.
We want the benefit of your knowledge; alternatively, we do not care to observe the tarnishing of your reputation and invalidations of your stated credentials that result from abject—unexpected and inconsistent—ad hominem attacks.
Mike:
I did not disown him until TARP bailout. I was for the war initially but by 2006 I figured he was not in it to win.
I like Steve Forbe’s free market stance. Although you are right he did come by his wealth pretty easily. But then so did JFK and FDR.
By the way I am reading the Communist Manifesto and know from my past incarnation as Bron98 your views on people that are fanatics. The historical section of comments from the editor are especially interesting and I see your point about fanatics of any stripe now.