Palin was active in a family organisation that distributed condoms - I could probably find the name if I weren't at the office - so that was never a question in my book, but of course it was so much easier to caricature her into a religious nut.
In other areas, her religious nuttery was not in doubt, but I am always willing to give credit where due. ;-)
Not that canard about not believing in evolution! She has specifically said she does, as the daughter of a science teacher.
I was being flip, dear. But, citation?
I think you're misapplying to make it into a canard. Whatever she believes about evolution, she's gone on record and clarified her record that she'd like creationism and evolution to be in the same classroom.
I can think of a couple of course descriptions that could fit them both in (first to mind: How Our Growing Understanding of Evolution Minimizes the Scope and Possibility of Biblical Creationism), but I'd imagine they'd be very unlikely to be taught in a k12 environment.
What did Palin say? http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/background/story/217111.html
:Asked for her personal views on evolution, Palin said, "I believe we have a creator."
She would not say whether her belief also allowed her to accept the theory of evolution as fact.
Palin said she thought there was value in discussing alternatives.
(Emphasis mine - she even thinks creationism and evolution are alternative to each other). Pretty nutty.
She has never said she does not believe in evolution. Not once, not ever. She does believe in some form of creationism, but contextual clues like the one above end to point toward the "there was a creator" aspect that, it should be noted, all religious generally believe.
I believe there is a creator but I don't think it should be discussed in a school science class, which she apparently does. If there was a comparative religion class I wouldn't have a problem with it being discussed there.
And that's a reasonable disagreement, but does not fit the implication about Palin that she's some idiot creationist or whatever.
I'd say the Creator issue isn't one - He created Darwin and evolution as well. (Several Nobel prizes, including Jacques Monod, say the amazing complexity of biology actually drew them back towards religion.
I have no problem with someone who says "I believe in evolution and in god." Fact and faith are not mutually exclusive; truth has more than one level.
Except, that's not what Palin said. When asked about evolution she said she believed in a Creator. She can't separate the origin of the species from the development of the species. She fails to acknowledge Evolution at all on first pass. On second pass, she said that they should be taught as competing ideas. Science fail.
I'd look into this one a little bit as well. She's definitely strongly religious (as are almost all politicians, as well as almost all Americans), but she's actually moved away from Pentecostalism
because she felt it was too extreme. There was a quote somewhere that she said the Pentecostals got too "weird."
I agree, during the VP debate I got the impression from her answers to the Pro-Choice/Pro-Life question was a little more rehearsed and a lot less sincere belief.
I still think she's scary.
During the VP debate, I got the impression from her answers to nearly all of the questions were a little more rehearsed and a lot less sincere belief. :-D
Well, I'm sure she believed the gun part.
I suspect that Sarah Palin is slightly to the left of my own mother on most issues. Make of that what you will.
Then, the problem that arises from this, is that she was obviously allowing herself to be painted in a certain light that wasn't really her true belief, just to get more voters. Yeah, you can give me the line about how that's just how politics work, but that really bothers me more (and it bothers me on both sides) than if she sincerely believed in abstinence-only education.
Politics suck. XP And I secretly hope that Bristol grows up, writes a tell-all about what her family is really like and then runs for the Senate as a democrat.