What Do Creationists Think About Sarah Palin?
Since I’ve posted two articles about Sarah Palin’s statements on creationism, let’s go across the aisle and see what the fanatical Darwin-hating creationists at “Answers In Genesis” think. They’re also examining Palin’s statements, and of course they’re eagerly hoping she’ll be an advocate for their weird pseudo-science: Is She Really a Creationist?
(Notice how they add footnotes everywhere to make it seem like a scholarly work.)
Before we look at Gov. Palin’s beliefs on creation/evolution (she has certainly shown a willingness to express her doubts about the scientific validity of evolution), we should add that caution needs to be exercised in this area before confidently declaring her to be a biblical young-earth creationist. There are all kinds of origins views that span a spectrum that is bookended by a literal Genesis creation on one end and naturalistic evolution on the other. Most politicians, when asked about their origins beliefs, try to answer somewhere between the two bookends, settling into a comfortable place in between so as not to alienate those who believe in a Creator (the overwhelming majority of Americans) while protecting themselves from allegations that they reject mainstream science. We recall that in 2007, Republican candidate for president Gov. Mike Huckabee put up his hand during a debate to show that he did not believe in evolution. Some creationists quickly rejoiced, concluding that Mr. Huckabee, a former Baptist pastor, must believe in a literal, straightforward reading of Genesis. Later, however, he made it clear that he did not necessarily want to be identified with young-earth creationism, saying that he was not sure about a six-day creation.
Although the AiG ministry does not issue political recommendations and will not (in fact, cannot per IRS restrictions) be an advocate for any presidential or vice presidential candidate, we believe that during a time when the creation/evolution debate is hot enough in today’s “culture wars” to become an issue again in a presidential campaign, we will briefly look at the few comments we have found from Gov. Palin on her views about creation/evolution. The statements we have found thus far were made while she was a candidate for governor, when asked about the teaching of biological origins in Alaska’s public schools.
In 2006, then-candidate Palin indicated in a TV debate that creation should be taught alongside evolution in the state’s public schools, declaring that schools should “teach both. You know, don’t be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it’s so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both.” Now, in stating this, she may have been advocating the teaching of scientific creationism, as opposed to biblical creationism (the latter having been deemed unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 19875), but we don’t really know.
In an interview the next day, Palin (if the Anchorage Daily News report is correct) appeared to backpedal somewhat, saying that she meant to say that a discussion of alternative views should be allowed but not forced on students, adding: “I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum.” In other words, Palin was not suggesting that the teaching of creation should be mandated (perhaps realizing that her statement the day before came across as arguing that creation must be in the science curriculum).
The Anchorage newspaper also reported her as saying she would not push the state’s board of education (governors in Alaska appoint board members, and the legislators confirm them) to add creationist alternatives to evolution to the state’s curriculum.
You can almost feel the disappointment, can’t you? But please note, the Answers in Genesis crowd is quick to reassure the world that they don’t want to force creationism on students—not because it’s wrong or anything, but because science teachers trained in “Darwinism” wouldn’t be able to teach their pseudo-science well enough.
Gov. Palin’s clarification of her views on the teaching of origins in public schools mirrors AiG’s general view: biblical creation should not be forced into classrooms, specifically because science teachers with a strong belief in evolution would teach creation poorly, so it would ultimately be counterproductive for the students.
Instead, they’re in favor of “teaching the controversy,” the current strategy of creationists and proponents of “intelligent design.” Rather than force their hooey into schools, they want to sneak it in.
Incidentally, it should be noted that there is no such position as a “neutral” or “non-religious” stance in this debate. Public school biology textbooks and many teachers explain the origin of the universe and life through “natural” processes, defining science as explaining things by “natural” processes. They are indoctrinating students in an atheistic religious belief—that no god is or has been involved; thus, naturalism—in essence, atheism—is now the religion taught in public schools. Parents need to wake up to the fact that public education is not non-religious. Even the Bible affirms that one is either for Christ or against—clearly teaching that there is no such “neutral” position.
If you don’t want to turn the clock back to medieval times and deny most of modern science, then according to Answers in Genesis you’re a damned atheist. And you can’t be neutral, or believe in God and evolution; it’s creationism or hell.
This is how they manipulate the gullible. It’s disturbing and cult-like. Their way is the only way, and God Himself (using Answers in Genesis as His vessel) says so. Depart from the one true path and you are the enemy.
We will continue to seek out additional comments from Gov. Palin regarding her beliefs on creation/evolution.
As will we.
Belief in God does not preclude belief in evolution.
Belief in evolution does not preclude belief in God.
Do not trust those who insist otherwise.
— Lao Stinky