Is Canada's Science Minister a creationalist?

[M.Dancer]

Creationism is part of Jewish, Sikh, Muslim and Hindu religions to name a few. Would that disqualify all of them as well. Chretien is a practicing Catholic, is he a creationist or evolutionist? Did anyone ever ask him? Ujjal Dosange is a Sikh, would anyone dare ask him that question if he was made science minister in a Liberal cabinet? I doubt it. Would anyone have asked Herb Dahliwal that question if he had been science minister in a Chretien cabinet? I doubt it. People need to be judged on their actions, not their religious beliefs otherwise few of us are qualified to do anything. I am an evolutionist because so far it has met every scientific test possible but it is not absolutely provable and as such, still a theory. The best theory IMO, but still a theory.

\Creationism is peculiar to protestant evangelical Christians. It is disingenuous to posit that other faiths which have no creationist agenda actually do.

Now let me be clear, there is a difference between creation myths held by most religions and creationism. Creationism is a christian movement which vainly attempts to prove the biblical account in Genesis is 100% accurate.

[blueblood]

The next Minister of Agriculture will say that rotating crops is hogwash, plant the same thing in the same spot year after year or suffer some funding cuts to farm programmes.

And your reply will be "There is nothing wrong with having personal beliefs and being able to do your job"

I doubt it.You are too smart for that.

The article didn't say he was cutting funding because he believes it is wrong, it appears funding is cut because tories by nature are cheapskates.

This looks like a non issue, and potshots at a guy for believing in something. If he ends up doing a crappy job, he should be canned, but there is no evidence that he is doing a crappy job.

Your ag minister example, would be doing a crappy job and would promptly be shown the door.

I didn't see anything wrong with what he was saying and it seems he wants the private sector to foot the bill of funding vs. taxpayers. It didn't even say he was wanting to cut.

Cripes we still have stem cell research in Canada, if he was a nutbar it would have been cut. This guy seems to be doing an all right job to me.

[ToadBrother]

The article didn't say he was cutting funding because he believes it is wrong, it appears funding is cut because tories by nature are cheapskates.

This looks like a non issue, and potshots at a guy for believing in something. If he ends up doing a crappy job, he should be canned, but there is no evidence that he is doing a crappy job.

Your ag minister example, would be doing a crappy job and would promptly be shown the door.

I didn't see anything wrong with what he was saying and it seems he wants the private sector to foot the bill of funding vs. taxpayers. It didn't even say he was wanting to cut.

Cripes we still have stem cell research in Canada, if he was a nutbar it would have been cut. This guy seems to be doing an all right job to me.

So having a Creationist as Minister responsible for science doesn't twig you in the least?

I'm just wondering, is there a Tory supporter anywhere around here who thinks that such a situation is, on one level, a complete joke, and another, a sad testament on where the priorities of the Tories lie.

Edited March 17, 2009 by ToadBrother

[jdobbin]

Sorry Dobbin It is not the defense minister that dictates foreign policy. It is his job to make sure the military is up to the assigned task. Cabinate as a whole can decide foreign policy but not one minister.

Think that is what I said. The Defence minister and cabinet decide what the mission is, not the military. The Defence minister is not merely an accountant as you seem to suggest.

A Defence minister has to believe in a mission to do his job properly.

So a minister who only speaks english can't apprecaite the French lauguage or Culture?

I said a minister who doesn't believe in French. Try to keep that straight.

[capricorn]

Goodyear was just about forced to publicly voice his belief on the theory of evolution.

Science minister ends evolution brouhaha

Canada's Science Minister has cut short a brewing controversy over his views on evolution.

Gary Goodyear raised eyebrows when he refused to tell The Globe and Mail newspaper if he believes in the science of evolution.

But the Minister of State for Science and Technology flatly said today that he does indeed believe in evolution.

Mr. Goodyear said he refused to answer Tthe Globe question because it was “irrelevant” and his beliefs have nothing to do with government policy.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto.../politics/home/

The brouhaha was of course caused by a Globe and Mail reporter whose sole intent was to embarrass the Minister.

This from the comments section in the above article about sums it up.

The Globe and Mail appears to be in more of a sociopathic mood than usual, with its deceitful headline: "Science Minister ends evolution brouhaha".

After all, a more accurate headline would be:

"Globe and Mail loses in its manufactured game of McCarthyist Witch-Hunting".

This was a non-story when the Globe and Mail originally reported it, and it is a non-story now.

And it never would have been a story making it to print in the first place at all if the politician had been a Hindu instead of a Christian.

And so, in summary: The Globe and Mail embarrasses itself and Canada by launching a front-page McCarthyist Witch Hunt against Christianity in High Office, and then, when there is no "there, there", the paper blames the Christian for having somehow (!) having been the cause of the "brouhaha".

This is classic sociopathic behavior 101, people.

Amazing stuff.

Let's see how far Goodyear's critics want to push this. Now the Globe (almost) said this is a tempest in a teapot. Indeed it is.

[blueblood]

So having a Creationist as Minister responsible for science doesn't twig you in the least?

I'm just wondering, is there a Tory supporter anywhere around here who thinks that such a situation is, on one level, a complete joke, and another, a sad testament on where the priorities of the Tories lie.

His job is to basically hand out money, and cut ribbons. Any idiot can be science minister. If this guy manages to f*** that job up, he's flat out brainless. So far, we still have stem cell research going on and research is still doing well.

If this guy starts rocking the boat and having the entire science community calling for his head, then can him. So far that just isn't happening.

Tories don't like to use public funds for research, they would rather the private sector foot the bill. Blaming a minister's belief's for following through on a pillar of tory ideology (less gov't funding) is ridiculous.

[ToadBrother]

Goodyear was just about forced to publicly voice his belief on the theory of evolution.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto.../politics/home/

The brouhaha was of course caused by a Globe and Mail reporter whose sole intent was to embarrass the Minister.

Being a Creationist ought to be embarass the Minister.

This from the comments section in the above article about sums it up.

Let's see how far Goodyear's critics want to push this. Now the Globe (almost) said this is a tempest in a teapot. Indeed it is.

Having a Minister responsible for science who is a Creationist and saying "That's moronic" is pushing it too far?

[blueblood]

Being a Creationist ought to be embarass the Minister.

Having a Minister responsible for science who is a Creationist and saying "That's moronic" is pushing it too far?

Being a bigot towards Christians is going to embarass the Globe and Mail

Discriminating based on a person's belief's/religion is also pushing it too far.

[Smallc]

Well then, if he's telling the truth, I think he's just find where he is.

[ToadBrother]

His job is to basically hand out money, and cut ribbons. Any idiot can be science minister. If this guy manages to f*** that job up, he's flat out brainless. So far, we still have stem cell research going on and research is still doing well.

Admitting your a Creationist when you're handing out money for science is, by definitino, f***ing it up.

If this guy starts rocking the boat and having the entire science community calling for his head, then can him. So far that just isn't happening.

I suspect the majority of the science community ain't very happy. They're not very happy with the Tories, anyways.

Tories don't like to use public funds for research, they would rather the private sector foot the bill. Blaming a minister's belief's for following through on a pillar of tory ideology (less gov't funding) is ridiculous.

Oh I agree, Tory ideology is pretty anti-science these days, but making a Creationist your science minister goes beyond that.

[jdobbin]

I wonder how it is that Lord Halifax did his job during WWII as he wanted to negociate peace with the Nazi's and not continue the war, yet he remained in the Cabinate an continued to do his job no less.

Actually, he was turfed out and sent to the U.S. as Ambassador. He did put the line in the sand though that brought Britain into the war.

By the way, he was not Defence minister. Just thought you should know.

[Progressive Tory]

Goodyear was just about forced to publicly voice his belief on the theory of evolution.

The brouhaha was of course caused by a Globe and Mail reporter whose sole intent was to embarrass the Minister.

It did bring up some interesting debate though and we know that Stockwell Day is a firm believer in the creationist theory. Hopefully, the Globe will apologize, but next time I'll bet Goodyear answers the question. It would have been relevant given his position.

[ToadBrother]

Being a bigot towards Christians is going to embarass the Globe and Mail

Discriminating based on a person's belief's/religion is also pushing it too far.

Oh good grief. Too far? Installing a man who thinks one of the major fields of scientific endeavor is in defiance of his religious beliefs as a minister of science is what I'd call taking it too far.

And once again, evolution is not anti-Christian. You keep repeating that, and it is a lie. Perhaps, when you've finished sticking pencils in your ears, you'll take a little look around. The Vatican just finished holding a conference on evolution, that didn't have any Creationists. The Vatican has long accepted that evolution is the best explanation for the life we see. Evolution is not anti-Christian, it is anti-Biblical literalist. But then again, the Church has been anti-Biblical literalist since at least St. Augustine's time.

This isn't about Christianity, it's about someone who clearly rejects science being responsible for dolling out money to scientists.

[ToadBrother]

It did bring up some interesting debate though and we know that Stockwell Day is a firm believer in the creationist theory. Hopefully, the Globe will apologize, but next time I'll bet Goodyear answers the question. It would have been relevant given his position.

Apologize for what? Outing the Cabinet minister responsible for science funding as a Creationist?

[jdobbin]

It's looking like only the appointment of an atheist to this job would satisfy the critics.

There are plenty of people who are religious who believe in evolution.

[jdobbin]

The best theory IMO, but still a theory.

But now the minister says it is a matter of religion.

[blueblood]

Oh good grief. Too far? Installing a man who thinks one of the major fields of scientific endeavor is in defiance of his religious beliefs as a minister of science is what I'd call taking it too far.

And once again, evolution is not anti-Christian. You keep repeating that, and it is a lie. Perhaps, when you've finished sticking pencils in your ears, you'll take a little look around. The Vatican just finished holding a conference on evolution, that didn't have any Creationists. The Vatican has long accepted that evolution is the best explanation for the life we see. Evolution is not anti-Christian, it is anti-Biblical literalist. But then again, the Church has been anti-Biblical literalist since at least St. Augustine's time.

This isn't about Christianity, it's about someone who clearly rejects science being responsible for dolling out money to scientists.

How does he reject science? The GM article even said that he supports it.

Has he mandated that all scientists should be forced to do creationism or lose funding?

Absolutely not

He's cutting funding because money is tight right now.

So far he's doing a good job.

But of course blame the Christian. It's all right to discriminate on religion if he's a Christian, but it's not all right for the others. Typical Leftist double standard malarkey. I bet if he was another religion this debate wouldn't be happening.

[Progressive Tory]

Apologize for what? Outing the Cabinet minister responsible for science funding as a Creationist?

Didn't someone just say that Goodyear claims he isn't? If he is it's relevant to his position. He should have just answered the question and it would have prevented all this.

[guyser]

The article didn't say he was cutting funding because he believes it is wrong, it appears funding is cut because tories by nature are cheapskates.

You are correct in that he did not say he would cut funding. I dont think anyone has said the opposite.

But a guy who has never been near a field is not likely to get any wiggle room over one who knows fields.

The same can be said here. When one starts a job with two feet already in the hole, it jst isnt going to work.

This looks like a non issue, and potshots at a guy for believing in something. If he ends up doing a crappy job, he should be canned, but there is no evidence that he is doing a crappy job.

There are no potshots, just incorrect optics. As for crappy and be canned , I agree w you.

I didn't see anything wrong with what he was saying and it seems he wants the private sector to foot the bill of funding vs. taxpayers. It didn't even say he was wanting to cut.

He would not answer a simple question, and it is he who has caused the kerfuffle. His one word answer , "yes" to the question concerning evolution would have prevented this.

[Molly]

Read the so-called retraction. He said, "

We are evolving every year, every decade. that's a fact, whether it is to, as a chiropractor, walking on cement vs. anything else, whether it's running shoes or high heel;s, of course we are evolving to our environment. But that's irrelevant"...

Damn straight that's irrelevant.

Someone care to show me where he's acknowledging the theory of evolution?

I see a creationist 'evolving' into his tap-dancing shoes.

[ToadBrother]

How does he reject science? The GM article even said that he supports it.

Has he mandated that all scientists should be forced to do creationism or lose funding?

Absolutely not

He's cutting funding because money is tight right now.

So far he's doing a good job.

Good job of what? Starving sciences and revealing that he's a Creationist who believes that a major branch of science is a matter of religious opinion?

But of course blame the Christian. It's all right to discriminate on religion if he's a Christian, but it's not all right for the others. Typical Leftist double standard malarkey. I bet if he was another religion this debate wouldn't be happening.

And one more time the lie about this being a matter of Christianity. This is about Creationism. Creationism IS NOT synonymous with Christianity. Why do you keep saying that?

[Wilber]

I can't speak to the Sikh faith, but it most certainly is not inherent in Judaism or Islam, nor even in Hinduism (whose Creation myths or so wildly different in most important respects from the Abrahamic religions that I can't imagine why you mention it). Literalism has not been part of the Jewish faith since at least the Hellenic Period.

Hinduism teaches the world is recreated every 14 billion years I believe. The Qur'an states Allah created the heavens and the earth and all that is between them in six days. Sound familiar? Genesis is part of the Torah which also states God created the world in six days but Judaism allows that the origin of species could be due to evolution. Sikhism also believes that God created the universe although it seems less specific as to the origin of species. Every religion has different degrees of literalism, that distinction doesn't just belong to Christianity. What is going on in Islam today should make that patently obvious.

[ToadBrother]

Hinduism teaches the world is recreated every 14 billion years I believe. The Qur'an states Allah created the heavens and the earth and all that is between them in six days. Sound familiar? Genesis is part of the Torah which also states God created the world in six days but Judaism allows that the origin of species could be due to evolution. Sikhism also believes that God created the universe although it seems less specific as to the origin of species. Every religion has different degrees of literalism, that distinction doesn't just belong to Christianity. What is going on in Islam today should make that patently obvious.

Except perhaps in some very conservative Jewish circles, I know of no Jewish sect that advocates a literal reading of Genesis. Judaism might very well be one of the worst examples you could bring up, as Judaism has long used what Christian Literalists would consider "extra-biblical sources" in interpreting the Bible (ie. the Mishnah). As to Islam, the current strains of Fundamentalism were not the norm throughout much of its history, and in Medieval times Islam produced some rather fine philosophers.

The issue here is not about Christianity specifically or about religion in general. Certain Christian sects reject evolution on religious grounds, but not all, and most certainly major churches like Anglicanism/Episcopalianism or Roman Catholicism have no issue with evolution. Trying to tie some line between anti-evolutionism and Christianity is simply a false dichotomy, though it's frequently invoked by religious conservatives in Canada and the States (and elsewhere) as a very dishonest ploy to make it sound like accepting biological evolution (and geology and cosmology) is somehow defying Christianity.

It's that position that Goodyear seems to have advocated, so not only is it anti-science, but it is also false on religious grounds, though his supporters seem keen to repeat the lie endlessly, making this sound like some sort of atheism vs. religion debate, which it is not.

[M.Dancer]

Hinduism teaches the world is recreated every 14 billion years I believe. The Qur'an states Allah created the heavens and the earth and all that is between them in six days. Sound familiar? Genesis is part of the Torah which also states God created the world in six days but Judaism allows that the origin of species could be due to evolution. Sikhism also believes that God created the universe although it seems less specific as to the origin of species. Every religion has different degrees of literalism, that distinction doesn't just belong to Christianity. What is going on in Islam today should make that patently obvious.

And ? None of that is creationism...those are creation mths....there iisn't a subtle difference, surely you understand that creation myths and creationism are two different things....

Or is it politically convient for you to seem dull in this regard?

[Smallc]

Read the so-called retraction.

It does seem to be a rather unscientific view of evolution, doesn't it.