Ben Carson is a Creationist

So what if Ben Carson is a creationist?

It is certainly true that Carson denies that life developed through random, unguided genetic mutations over millions of centuries. It is also true that he believes in literal six-day creationism (though he’s agnostic on the question of the planet’s age) and that

he attributes the rise of Darwinian thinking to the influence of “the Adversary” — i.e., Satan. Those are not mainstream views, but Carson has plainly thought about the subject and hasn’t been shy about explaining his conclusions, in both religious and scientific terms.

To be sure, he is seeking the presidency, not a science-related position. But would Carson’s views on evolution and creation be such a red flag to Democrats if his views generally were more in line with left-wing priorities?

The PROBLEM here, is that "creationism" is an ignorant mindset. We can NOT have a president who thinks it is true! We just can't!! That takes us to the level of ISIS - does no one else realize that?

Lots of you talk about how "religion" doesn't matter when it comes to electing leaders (while others of you say it definitely does) .

This guy, nice and skilled at surgery as he might be, does not acknowledge science as having proven that there was no "six days" creation thiing. There is no proof that "God" exists, or that "Jesus" was in any way special.

Yet, this guy, with his 'meek' tone, is saying that he believes in that ancient, outdated, ridiculous belief.

Really, ATS?

REALLY?

It's beyond absurd. It's a caricature; his persona is not much different than Trump's.

The GOP, if it keeps this up (Rand Paul stooped so low as to declare that Bernie Sanders' policies would result in 'mass genocide'), is indeed toast. Dead. Ruined. DOA. Dead on arrival. They are (as I have been stating since the midterms) DEFINITELY imploding.


Pandering to the "Christian Fundies" seems to be the secret recipe for their 'campaign.
Too bad that educated, intelligent people can't see that.

But, you know, perhaps I'm mistaken.

To be sure, he is seeking the presidency, not a science-related position. But would Carson’s views on evolution and creation be such a red flag to Democrats if his views generally were more in line with left-wing priorities?

I don't know the answer to that question.
But, I know FOR SURE that I would be beyond disappointed if someone was elected president who denies evolution and science.

Being "religious" is fine. Being IGNORANT is something else altogether.

I'm so sorry, ATS, but anyone who believes in the "six-days Ken Hamm style creationism" bs is - well, unfit to be our President.

Maybe I'll be banned for posting this, but I'm still doing it.

PLEASE, ATS, tell me how a "six-days creationist" who has NO political experience but believes in "Satan" is the best choice for running this country!!!!

So being a creationist means one is incapable of leadership? Don't crack open a history book you may be disappointed.

Whats new?

Politics always seems to attract the crazys.

You're right. We should elect a community organizer...

I fail to see how this would affect his ability to run the country. There are many more things that would keep him out IMO other than this.

a reply to: NihilistSanta

Don't even try that, Santa.

Being a "SIX-DAYS creationist" is a far cry from "Intelligent Design", and you know it.

This guy is a Bible-Thumping savant - a surgeon. He does NOT have the experience or skills to run a country.

O
M
G

So - you guys are fine with a person who has no experience in office, who believes literally in the Genesis account of how life developed, to run this nation?


Wow.

Okay, I started the thread, and I'm going to leave it here - and see what everyone else has to say about this.

Just want to leave a small aside note here: THEOCRATS are trouble.

Actually, Dr. Carson seems like one of the most intelligent, dare I say Presidential of all the candidates available. You may have a bias against Dr. Carson's beliefs, but that doesn't make him wrong and definitely doesn't make him ignorant. Don't vote for him if you don't want to, but the man is impressive as a human being if nothing else.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Leadership is not dependent on your religion or theories regarding unknowable events. There are many scientist who would make terrible leaders. Not sure but if I recall correctly Albert Einstein was offered the presidency of Israel and passed it up probably because scientific knowledge and leadership are entirely separate skills and he recognized this.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs


Being a "SIX-DAYS creationist" is a far cry from "Intelligent Design", and you know it.

This guy is a Bible-Thumping savant - a surgeon. He does NOT have the experience or skills to run a country.

Carson even makes Trump seem rational....

www.rawstory.com...

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
O
M
G

So - you guys are fine with a person who has no experience in office, who believes literally in the Genesis account of how life developed, to run this nation?


Wow.

Okay, I started the thread, and I'm going to leave it here - and see what everyone else has to say about this.

Just want to leave a small aside note here: THEOCRATS are trouble.

You could use Obama as an example of a terrible President who got elected with no experience. That might help you strengthen your argument against Dr. Carson.

a reply to: Metallicus

I did not say he's not intelligent. Clearly he is.
I am concerned about his "religious beliefs" and his inexperience.

Nice guy? Maybe.
Capable of running a nation?

erm, no.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

The voracity of your condemnation of Christianity borders on a kind of extremism of its own.

I am more interested in what life experiences have led you to this conscious trap of anti-ness. Are you 666 by any chance? (that was a joke).

In this life you will encounter so much you will not agree with. Are you prepared to accept that we are all different and that if we have a spiritual discipline it does not mean you have to be our enemy?

To correct you, we who believe in Christ think He was very special indeed; Son of God special. What you clearly state is that if we believe this then in your book we are # for your shoe. I reckon you see yourself as better than those of us who have faith when I see someone who is very blinkered and intolerant of anything that does not fit with her way of being. Hitler had a problem this way, too. There were groups that he though were # for his shoe and look what he ended up doing...

It was probably pointless writing this to somebody like you, but the evening is easy and I have a littler spare time and really it's my pleasure.

You are stuck with being on this earth with me and billions of others who have a faith of some kind. Can you live with that?

a reply to: NihilistSanta

Who would your examples be?

a reply to: Revolution9

Condemnation of Christianity?

Nono. You've missed the point entirely. I'm simply stating that "the Bible" is NOT a relevant historical- OR guide-book, and the parables, metaphors, allegories, and ancient mythology transmitted first orally and then sorta kinda written down in it ("the Bible") are nothing more than "ancient literature."

If a qualified and successful neurosurgeon espouses the "creationist" thing - then, I'm sorry, but....

no. He is not fit to preside over the "free world." Nope.

No.

a reply to: Metallicus

Exactly the point I was trying to make. You made it better than I did.

Some are ok with someone having so little experience that it's almost minus experience as long as their personal beliefs line up. Others will not even consider a candidate if their personal beliefs do not line up even if they were the best person for the job. I find that odd, but it is what it is and that's why we all get a vote.

Politics...

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
this guy, with his 'meek' tone, is saying that he believes in that ancient, outdated, ridiculous belief.

Really, ATS?

REALLY?

It's beyond absurd.

Darwinism = ancient ✔

Darwinism = outdated ✔

Darwinism = a ridiculous belief ✔

Darwinism = absurd ✔

Really, ATS?

Evolutionism is nothing more than pagan mythology from ancient idol worshiping cultures...

Darwin basically plagiarized Anaximander who taught that humans evolved from fish.

Evolution and its related concepts did not originate from science. The concept of evolution emerged from the imaginations of men. Evolution is based in pagan mythology while later promoted among Greek philosophers like Anaximander and Democritus. Diodorus Siculus, a 1st c. BC historian, presented evolution in his “Universal History”, which was one of the beliefs of the ancient Egyptians. Diodorus recorded that the Egyptians believed that life originated in swamps and marshes eventually resulting in other life forms.

Pagan Origins of Evolution

"Gotta love how 'evolution theory' is historically demonstrated to be nothing but failed ancient mythology updated & repackaged with scientific lingo hijacked from Christian pioneers of science (Linnaeus, Ray, Mendel, Cuvier,etc), pushed by Freemasonic/Communist control of centralized gov't, universities, press, media & think-tanks backed by the satanic elite with their world Socialist revolution while 'Atheists' still cling to politically corrupt 'science' or point to imaginary 'evidence'." Source

"The theory of evolution came from the Hindu Brahmins. Pantheistic evolution was passed down by Pythagoras to the Greeks. Thales and his Ionic School branched out from Pantheistic Evolution to Naturalistic Evolution. Plato and Aristotle's evolutionary ideas were dispersed through the Alexandrian School in Egypt.

The ideas were followed through the Middle Ages (Aquinas), Renaissance and into Freemasonry, where they were preserved. Freemasonry and the Enlightenment had a re-birth of the philosophy of evolution. Lord Monboddo and Erasmus Darwin carried the philosophy forward. Charles Darwin, coaxed by Charles Lyell, developed the idea."

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Revolution9

In this life you will encounter so much you will not agree with. Are you prepared to accept that we are all different and that if we have a spiritual discipline it does not mean you have to be our enemy?

Yep! I am prepared to do that.

A "spiritual discipline" is NOT the same as actually BELIEVING that the Genesis story is true and accurate.

I don't want to be your enemy. I want you to understand how ridiculous the "six days" creation story is.

Wow the defense of this is strange...

I would say this is an example of either his lack of critical thinking, which I don't think he lacks, or that he refuses to see the forest for the trees and is blind because of faith.

If we think having a muslim with staunch religious ideas would be horrible, how is this any better?
His tax plan, at least he reasoning behind it, is taken from religious practice.

Wonder what other laws or policies he would then take from the bible...

To me that is a red flag for the leader of our nation, that he wouldn't be able to put his faith in the back seat and look at issues objectively.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

He is a preacher with a lot of money and he will never get my vote, we have enough fundamentalist in government already.

He belongs in church no in the white house.

a reply to: Kangaruex4Ewe

So since Obama was a bad president that lacked experience we should try it again???
I am confused on how that makes sense...