It appears that our favorite religionist candidate for president has been taken down by none other than Richard Dawkins. And not just him, but all the rest of the Republican field of candidates for president, who seem to be falling all over each other to pander to the religious far right as much as possible.
Going well beyond Perry's stance on evolution, Dawkins discusses in depth what Perry's comments on evolution actually mean, and what it would portent for a Perry presidency. In that sense alone, this editorial is worth reading - and passing along to your Republican friends. He gets right to the heart of what is wrong with the USAnian polity these days.
====Attention Governor Perry: Evolution is a fact
Q. Texas governor and GOP candidate Rick Perry, at a campaign event this week, told a boy that evolution is ”just a theory” with “gaps” and that in Texas they teach “both creationism and evolution.” Perry later added “God is how we got here.” According to a 2009 Gallup study , only 38 percent of Americans say they believe in evolution. If a majority of Americans are skeptical or unsure about evolution, should schools teach it as a mere “theory”? Why is evolution so threatening to religion?
A. There is nothing unusual about Governor Rick Perry. Uneducated fools can be found in every country and every period of history, and they are not unknown in high office. What is unusual about today’s Republican party (I disavow the ridiculous ‘GOP’ nickname, because the party of Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt has lately forfeited all claim to be considered ‘grand’) is this: In any other party and in any other country, an individual may occasionally rise to the top in spite of being an uneducated ignoramus. In today’s Republican Party ‘in spite of’ is not the phrase we need. Ignorance and lack of education are positive qualifications, bordering on obligatory. Intellect, knowledge and linguistic mastery are mistrusted by Republican voters, who, when choosing a president, would apparently prefer someone like themselves over someone actually qualified for the job.
Any other organization -- a big corporation, say, or a university, or a learned society - -when seeking a new leader, will go to immense trouble over the choice. The CVs of candidates and their portfolios of relevant experience are meticulously scrutinized, their publications are read by a learned committee, references are taken up and scrupulously discussed, the candidates are subjected to rigorous interviews and vetting procedures. Mistakes are still made, but not through lack of serious effort.
The population of the United States is more than 300 million and it includes some of the best and brightest that the human species has to offer, probably more so than any other country in the world. There is surely something wrong with a system for choosing a leader when, given a pool of such talent and a process that occupies more than a year and consumes billions of dollars, what rises to the top of the heap is George W Bush. Or when the likes of Rick Perry or Michele Bachmann or Sarah Palin can be mentioned as even remote possibilities....
Well said. Another aspect of behavior too commonly seen, and which mystifies, me is that some of these people are incurious and seemingly proud of that as well. The universe is an amazing place - it is wonderful to find ways to reliably learn about it.
Perry is trying to gather votes from the religious. So, as usual he is appealing to them. He had that prayer rally in Houston, not too long ago.
Thanks for the post -- enjoyed reading it.