Would you want a president who doesn't believe in evolution?

Question

Why or why not?

Answer 1

No. Evolution is the recognized leading scientific explanation of how we came about. For a leader to stubbornly reject the science we teach in our schools would put him at odds with not only mainstream America but also with the pursuit of knowledge and the benefits of science that so define our culture.

Answer 2

It should not matter much. The theories and issues on evolution are rather vague, unproven and some are even unbelievable. The leader of a country, institution or any person in authority should not dwell on topics which are indefinite, theoretical or philosophical. You have to be convincing as a leader and have facts and figures to back up your arguments, but in evolution, it isn't possible.
I prefer a president who believes in the sanctity of human lives and well-being and who makes every effort to uphold the Constitution. That only is good enough for every citizen.

Answer 3

Evolution is a concept no longer a shown fact. And creationism isn't so unreal if we take up all the medical info. Scientists at present do no longer choose to nicely known that human non-sensory-aided psychological concept (which incorporate insightful concept that arises with relationship) shows that the recommendations isn't the recommendations yet rather is a non-actual entity. that's info that would blow evolutionary concept marvelous out of the water! So it sort of feels to me that if the subsequent US president exchange right into a creationist, which would be good because of the fact perhaps they could help convey some medical reformation! there's a ought to take down the overwhelming impression of atheist scientists who choose to present technological information as info that for the duration of basic terms materialism is genuine and doing it via denying the info that already exists.

Answer 4

I personally wouldn't care one way or the other. There are much more important criteria in determining who should run the country (such as understanding the laws of cause and effect, in regards to foreign policy and economics, as well as other matters) than whether a president believes in evolution or creation. There is insufficient evidence to make any intelligent and unbiased decision between those two theories, so it shouldn't even be a big deal.

I don't care one way or the other regarding theories of the origins of life. They are as psuedoscientific as a theory of the afterlife would be.

Answer 5

if he is a good president i would have to say i don't care about that, i don't need to.
http://www.expelledthemovie.com/playground.php

check out the clip about how tolerant the science community is about people questioning evolution. they are as bad and closed minded as the creationists they replaced one religion for another

any one who says that evolution is not theory but fact is a idiot

and i believe in evolution to a extent , right now id say intelligent design is about as good a theory as any other out there




And this year, we are proud to report that in every subject but Science, students and faculty are free to challenge ideas, and seek truth wherever it may lead.

But Science is different. In Science, there is no room for dissent, for dissent is dangerous. That is why we at Big Science simply refuse to allow it. Like dancing, “dissent” can lead to other things.
As you know…last year we had the misfortune of “presupposition of design” rearing its ugly head, with several students challenging Neo-Darwinian materialism, and arguing incessantly for the right to examine Intelligent Design.
They were all Expelled, of course – but still: it just goes to show where academic freedom can lead, if not shut down immediately!

Sincerely,

Charles Darwin

Answer 6

We have one......in any case 'evolution' isn't something you 'believe'......not 'believing' a 'fact' is simply being dumb. It's like not 'believing' gravity. The case for evolution is based on thousands of data point that can't be fudged.....even if some of the data points can be challenged. Evolution isn't simply a single 'fact', it's a large series of proven 'facts'. That's why it's called a theory...A 'theory' is a coherent group of general propositions, based on observed data used as an explaination for a class of phenomena. While the exact events and chemistry of evolution aren't fully 'proven' there are more than enough data points that can't be 'disproven' to make this 'theory' the only one that can cover almost all of the questions. Believe it or not!

Answer 7

It wouldn't matter to me either way. It would matter if this person was to design school curriculum or influence it but the President doesn't do either of these. The President does influence education but can't possibly deny the teaching of evolution. Unfortunately, many people don't understand that the Theory of Evolution is fact. The word "theory" in this context means that it's generally understood as scientific fact, which is different than what most people think of when they here the word "theory". Most people use it in the context of "so your theory is...", which indicates uncertainty.

Answer 8

Not believing in evolution would be a bit like not believing in the computer you're facing right now.

I need a President who is firmly rooted in reality, thank you.

Answer 9

Certainly not. While there are questions to Darwin's theory, it seems more likely it's closer to the truth than those funny little Bible stories. But you'll probably never have one that doubts the Bible. All presidential candidates' religions seem to be common knowledge. It's really personal, this religious stuff. What business do any of us have to scrutinize these people so much?

Answer 10

Yes I would like to have a President who doesn't believe in Evolution. I want a President who believes that we come Adam & Eve and that we are the By-Products of An Almighty and Merciful God.