Bush wants Intelligent Design as Alternative to Evolution

[Pangloss]

Well Rick Santorum does not meet the qualifications of my original question. Let me repeat that, since it has fallen back behind us there on the first page.

 

One thing I wonder about is which Republican presidential hopefull, currently labelled a "moderate", will be the first to cave in on ID in the classrooms. It's an easy cave for a presidential candidate, if you're looking for a way to pander to the religious right, because they really won't have anything to do with whether or not it happens. (Seeing as it's something that typically gets fought out at the local level.)

 

Rick Santorum is not a moderate, and as you point out, John, his position on the issue is already well known, so I'm afraid he doesn't qualify for this particular question.

 

I still think it's an interesting question, but it doesn't sound like anybody wants to take a stab at it.

[Douglas]

This would be true of a general election, but remember, the candidate first must be approved by party voters, deciding amongst themselves (i.e. the "primary" system). Hence why we have George Bush in office instead of John McCain.

Good point, and I s'pose Bush would have endorsed ID in the primaries, and still won the general election. As an aside, I wonder who got the religious right vote between Bush, Baur and Keyes in the early 2000 primaries.

[Douglas]

But as we saw this week, and MulderMan pointed out on the previous page, the President often sets the agenda, or curriculum. So ID got a big boost this week when President Bush talked about it.

True, but an impotent boost, since the curriculum IMO is pretty much set by the left.

[Phi for All]

True, but an impotent boost, since the curriculum IMO is pretty much set by the left.

Possibly in left-leaning states, but this statement can hardly be applied to all of them. Witness the 20 states where the idea has been gaining support, and where creationism is still the driving influence behind the curriculum change.

[Douglas]

Possibly in left-leaning states, but this statement can hardly be applied to all of them. Witness the 20 states where the idea has been gaining support, and where creationism is still the driving influence behind the curriculum change.

Yeah yer right Phi, there *are* states where creationism is a force.

 

What we need to find out is.....how many states support ID in the curriculum, and how many states support lessons on how to put a condom on a cucumber....

[Douglas]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4567253.stm

A little off topic' date=' but I noticed this quote from the BBC link.

 

[i']"I've made it very clear... the use of federal money, taxpayers' money, to promote science which destroys life in order to save life, I'm against that," [/i]

 

The actual quote.........

 

"I am a strong supporter of stem cell research, but I've made it very clear to Congress that the use of federal taxpayer money to promote science that destroys life in order to save life, I am against this."

[Phi for All]

What we need to find out is.....how many states support ID in the curriculum,

The article says 20, but does not list them.

and how many states support lessons on how to put a condom on a cucumber....

Wouldn't tell us a thing. Some of the most conservative people I know support vegetable birth control.

One thing I wonder about is which Republican presidential hopefull, currently labelled a "moderate", will be the first to cave in on ID in the classrooms.

I think you may see current labels change by election time. Even George Allen can afford moving a bit more towards center with the conservative backing he seems to have sewn up. The biggest danger of ID, imo, is that it seems logical to offer a wide range of studies to students, and if Allen decided to back it he could be spun as making concessions to conservatives and liberals.

 

I think much depends on how the public comes to view ID before the election; is it teaching religion or is it broadening the curriculum?

[Douglas]

Let me repeat that, since it has fallen back behind us there on the first page.

I guess the question is, who are the potential moderate republican candidates for 2008. Then which one is most likely to cave on ID.

 

I'm not sure where Jeb Bush and Cheney stand. Then of the names that I've heard bantied about are Schwarzenegger, Pataki, Guilliani, Hagel, Romney and maybe even Newt (not a moderate). Romney is a latter day saint, maybe he'd cave.

 

Edited to add....If the Schwarzenegger amendment passes.

[Phi for All]

I guess the question is, who are the potential moderate republican candidates for 2008.

Here's a list I found from Politics1.com. I couldn't find how up to date this list is, and it's all Republicans, not just the moderates.

[Pangloss]

That sounds about right, but I'd subtract Jeb from the list Douglas stated above, and add John McCain. Cheney isn't a moderate, but it's a moot point, as he's not going to run (but I do think McCain will take a crack at it). Ahnold can't run, of course.

 

Other moderate Republicans to keep an eye on include Colin Powell, Tom Ridge, Arlen Specter (hey, if McCain's gonna run....), and Michael Bloomberg.

[Pangloss]

Rick Santorum will support ID. He won't "cave"' date=' because he supports it.

 

an excerpt from a speech he made

 

"The Ohio decision means that students will be taught to critically analyze Darwin’s theory, including the scientific evidence for and against it. The decision also allows but specifically does not mandate the teaching of the scientific case for intelligent design as an alternative theory."

 

This all shows the serious lack of science education in the US. I know I didn't learn didly about evolution in school. The more ignorant the population, the more likely they will succumb to fundamentalist and extremist ideas. The struggle against extremism the Bush admin is talking about may need to start in our schools. [/quote']

 

 

Interestingly, Santorum did an about-face today.

 

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-08-04T191725Z_01_N04247382_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-POLITICS-EVOLUTION-DC.XML

 

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - A leading Republican senator allied with the religious right differed on Thursday with President Bush's support for teaching an alternative to the theory of evolution known as "intelligent design."

 

Republican Sen. Rick Santorum, a possible 2008 presidential contender who faces a tough re-election fight next year in Pennsylvania, said intelligent design, which is backed by many religious conservatives, lacked scientific credibility and should not be taught in science classes.

 

He backed off from complete disagreement, though, saying in essence that he still feels ID has a place, but not as a science.

 

Oddly enough, this position scores a lot of points with me personally. Unlike Bill Frist's pathetic flip-flop last week, this one actually resonates with me somewhat.

[john5746]

Rick Santorum is not a moderate' date=' and as you point out, John, his position on the issue is already well known, so I'm afraid he doesn't qualify for this particular question.

 

I still think it's an interesting question, but it doesn't sound like anybody wants to take a stab at it.[/quote']

 

I didn't read your post correctly, sorry about that. It is interesting that Santorum changed his mind. Since he is completely ignorant of the issue, it is understandable.

 

I don't think this will be an issue in the Repub primaries and probably a rather small one in the general election. I don't see any moderates supporting ID as a science in school.

[Douglas]

Some of the most conservative people I know support vegetable birth control.

I don't:.... It's funny, for the past few weeks I've been pollinating my cucumber patch, picking a male flower and pollinating a female flower with it.

[Phi for All]

I don't:.... It's funny, for the past few weeks I've been pollinating my cucumber patch, picking a male flower and pollinating a female flower with it.

Let's stay on topic. Is this Politics or Pollinatics?