This article is in London’s Daily Mail. It’s titled White hot Bachmann calls for schools to teach intelligent design as she electrifies GOP leadership conference.
The newspaper quotes Bachmann as saying the following:
‘I support intelligent design,’ she told reporters after the Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans yesterday.
‘What I support is putting all science on the table and letting students decide.
‘I don’t think it’s a good idea for government to come down on one side of a scientific issue or another, when there is reasonable doubt on both sides…. That’s why I believe the federal government should not be involved in local education to the most minimal process.’
The rest of the article is about other issues and other candidates. We’ll skip all that because we’re focusing here on Bachmann. Our last post about her was Hey Michele Bachmann: Show Us Your Laureates.
When there are so many other issues, why is Bachmann’s creationism important? During the 2008 Presidential election campaign we wrote our Open Letter to Sarah Palin. In the Palin letter we said:
Do you truly believe that the earth is no more than 10,000 years old? Do you reject the theory of evolution and all the evidence which supports it, in favor of the Genesis creation account?
This is important — not because a Vice President (and possibly President) needs to know anything about geology, biology, and astronomy, but because the person who occupies such a position needs to be rational. We must know if you understand the difference between science and faith. Do you accept the existence of objective reality, or do you deny it?
[C]an you keep your faith in Genesis apart from the way you evaluate evidence and make decisions in the secular world? If so, we can accept that. But you have to tell us.
There are bigger problems facing the country. In our most divisive post ever — Creationism or Socialism: Which is Dumber? — everyone disagreed with us, rather vigorously, but we reluctantly concluded:
In deciding between creationism and socialism, the latter is by far the worse alternative. That is our unhappy guide to figuring out the choices which the current US elections provide us. The creationist candidate — if opposed to socialism — is the lesser of the two evils.
But unlike Palin (who seems to be a private creationist with no compulsion to force that view upon others) Bachmann is a special case. She has always impressed us as being genuinely insane. It’s possible that she could surprise us and change our opinion, but that doesn’t seem likely. We could have tolerated Palin, but were Bachmann to be the GOP nominee, we’d have to stay home on election day.
Copyright © 2011. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.