I just read something which completely blew my mind.

At the Republican debate of presidential contenders, held at the Reagan museum, when Chris Matthews asked the Republican Presidential candidates to raise thier hand if they did not beleive in evolution, three actually raised thier hands.

(what?!!)

The nutty three are Sam Brownback, Sentaor from Kansas, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, and Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo. A Senator, a Governor, and a Representative. Powerful men still in office, in places which still have initiatives pushing to start teaching Creationism in public schools, in science class.

!

These kooks (let's be frank about it) are pandering to a fundamentalist religious base which has large and growing clout, remains GW Bush's staunchest base, and has a wide ranging agenda which can only be described as theocratic. Their interpretations of Christianity are considered kooky by everyone else, including other Christians.

Certainly this is an issue with tremendous political, and frankly American social evolutionary significance, that Democrats should address.

Q: The kooky three Republican presidential candidates are bad enough, but how about the others who didn't raise their hands?

Q: Are Republicans comfortable addressing the issues and taking a strong stand for science, evolution, the constitution, and secular government?

Q: To what extent are the Republican candidates depending upon, and hoping to turn out, the religious fundamentalist vote?

Q: To what extent will Republican candidates pander to, and make back room deals, with fundamentalists leaders?

Q: Aren't religious fundamentalists more similar to the people of various third world countries than the people of our developed allied nations?

Q: Aren't fundamentalists actually a dangerous form of zealous cultural devolution? Actually dangerous radicals by the standards of developed Western nations?

Republicans should be asked those questions until they are wiling to definitively state their position. Secular voting Americans, across the political spectrum, deserve to know whether Republicans are pandering to religious fundamentalists and what back room deals are being cut to secure the Fundamentalist voting bloc.

Bush while campaigning for 2000 spoke at Bob Jones University, which is known for being very Presbyterian Fundamentalist, vehemently anti-Catholic, nepotistic, and has only recently become accredited with the goal of turning out diplomaed fundamentalist soldiers.

After McCain criticized Bush for speaking there, for their anti-Catholic views and ban on interracial dating, it was a BJU professor who started the rumor McCain had an illegitimate black child after he adopted a child from Bangladesh, which was then push-polled and hurt McCain significantly in during the primary.

Shortly after George W. Bush won re-election in 2004, Bob Jones III sent him a congratulatory letter asserting that the new President had "been given a mandate" and urging him to put his "agenda on the front burner and let it boil. You owe the liberals nothing. They despise you because they despise your Christ."

Now McCain is courting fundamentalist votes and has said he wouldn't turn down an opportunity to speak at Bob Jones University. Similarly, Guliani and Romney have been courting fundamentalist votes.

..

I've recently been reading and would recommend The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design, Expanded Edition by Ronald L. Numbers who is a scholar respected by both scientists and creationists for his nuance and diligence studying the subject.

"Praised by both creationists and evolutionists for its comprehensiveness, the book meticulously traces the dramatic shift among Christian fundamentalists from acceptance of the earth's antiquity to the insistence of present-day scientific creationists that most fossils date back to Noah's flood and its aftermath. Focusing especially on the rise of this "flood geology," Ronald L. Numbers chronicles the remarkable resurgence of antievolutionism since the 1960s, as well as the creationist movement's tangled religious roots in the theologies of late-nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century Baptists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, and Adventists, among others. His book offers valuable insight into the origins of various "creation science" think tanks and the people behind them. It also goes a long way toward explaining how creationism, until recently viewed as a "peculiarly American" phenomenon, has quietly but dynamically spread internationally--and found its expression outside Christianity in Judaism and Islam."