As I understand it, this "creation science" favored by Ron Paul and many other Christians does not necessarily dispute random mutations and other evolutionary changes supported by scientific consensus. They just tend to believe it follows a plan designed by God.
_____ From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Holtz Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 10:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [email protected] Subject: [marketliberal] RE: [OutrightLibertarians] Just when you thought Brian Miller was done hating on Ron Paul and his supporters... I agree with Rob's take on Ron Paul's apparent creationism. It's relevant not only for gay rights, but even more so because it underlines Paul's willingness to pander to the fundamentalist Christian Right, and it leads Paul to place undue emphasis on fetal rights over maternal rights. However, I think George Phillies is clearly stretching things when he says "people who reject evolution are unfit to be President, because evolution in the form of microoganisms evolving to be drug-resistant is a serious issue for the health of our soldiers, and if you reject evolution you can't cope with Medical Corps issues in a sane manner." It's just not credible to claim we have evidence that Paul doesn't believe in microevolution/selection for drug resistance. Brian Holtz http://LibertarianI <http://LibertarianIntelligence.com> ntelligence.com Signal Intelligence About The LP <http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=11708624/grpspId=1705060169/msgI d=2510/stime=1199083657/nc1=3848621/nc2=4725795/nc3=4776364>
