thats as far as i’m willing to go in her defense. she believes that if raped by a dinosaur, she should be responsible for her own dinorape kit, and should not be able to abort the dino-human-baby.

The dinosaur and human footprints that Palin refers to have been debunked as a hoax. I believe the thing that tipped people off was the tiny tool marks, though this article says that the hoaxer confessed as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glen_Rose_Formation

I expected people to think of this right away. Am I only familiar with it because I had a quarter of “Origins” at my Christian high school? I have no idea what year this was debunked, so perhaps people were still using it as evidence back when she was in school.

There’s a lot to be said for “evidence” like this that’s easier to understand than carbon dating. If you can’t use that to persuade, I’d point to 14,000 years of tree rings.

And #66, thanks for the links – they’re very good points to make about the rape kit situation.

When my son first told me his Christian school’s curriculum taught that the world is only around 5,000 years old, I told him to forget about that. I taught him about the fossils paleontologists have found and carbon dating. I told him about the Sumerian civilization which has been dated to much earlier than what his teachers have told him the world has existed.

Anyone that has any grasp on science has to accept that the Earth is around 4.5 billion years old. If you want to reconcile that fact with what the Bible teaches, there are tons of ambiguities in the Bible that allow you to accept what science teaches is the actual age of the earth.

I’m just going to have to hope Palin has been misquoted here. Otherwise it just points to blind religious acceptance, or stupidity. Of couse as a Republican, if the latter is true, I just have to ignore it and hope for the best.

For me, it would take an awful lot of blind faith to believe the evolutionist view over a proven God creation. “There is a way that seems right unto a man, but the ends there of are the ways of death”.

I praise Palin for standing up, in this case, for the Word of God.

Is anyone else worried that we’re on the way to becoming the society in Margaret Atwood’s “The Handmaid’s Tale” if Palin gets into office? I live in a pretty “red” part of Texas, and I keep wondering if everyone around me has lost their minds whenever I see McCain/Palin yard signs and bumper stickers everywhere.

Anytime anyone cites scrutiny of Palin’s beliefs as evidence of bigotry against Christians, tell them that Creationism as we know it today didn’t exist until the 19th century and that Christian thinkers as far back as St. Augustine argued pretty strenuously against interpreting the creation narrative in Genesis literally.

Is it me, or Palin looks more scary than Bush and Co.? I mean, the current lot look like biblethumpers who are only into that to reap a sweet profit, and keep their popular base by “appeasing their god”, but now Palin actually seems to believe that kind of almost medieval mumbo-jumbo.

Let’s ride with the family down the street.
Through the courtesy of McCain’s two feet.

When you’re with the Republicans
you’ll have a yabba dabba doo time.
A dabba doo time.
You’ll have a emphatically non-gay old time.

Thanks for your input Peggie. Others would argue however that evolution is more than a ‘view’.

In some ways, I have more admiration for fundamentalist Christians than I do for more liberal Christians. At least they hold to their beliefs. They don’t say “well, I believe some bits of the Bible and not others, and I just decide which pieces I want to believe”. They say “for some of the Bible to be true, it all has to be true” and so they hold to beliefs like dinosaurs co-existed with man because the world is only 10,000 years old, so there couldn’t have been dinosaurs millions of years ago.

Of course, just because I respect their dedication doesn’t mean I want them making domestic policy decisions based on 5,000-year-old mystical beliefs.

for the mthrfckn win!!! :)

If you’d asked me that in 1997, I might have said something similar, but my views have “evolved” since then. Palin has switched from an AoG church to a more “moderate” church. Her religious views on the origin of life may have moderated too. Most people don’t realize that Intelligent Design isn’t most of all (at all?) a stalking horse for young earth creationism, its a version of “creationism” that more moderate believers can latch on to.

I’d also like to remind everyone that the constitution prohibits ANY religious test for office holding. :)

But if that disqualifies her as “unscientific” then I wonder which presidents have been disqualified?

Again, I despise Palin and think Creationism is an insult to reason, but I can’t help but think that we wouldn’t be so quick to take at face value the word of a conservative blogger who had something pejorative to say about Obama.

Just playing Devil’s Advocate here. Disemvowelling in 3…2…1…