Skip to comments.Darwinists Root for Obama
Posted on 09/29/2008 9:32:48 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Darwinists Root for Obama
Sept 28, 2008 Ministers in churches are not allowed to promote political candidates, even though they do not take government money.1 Scientists, who often do take federal money in the form of grants, openly take positions on the presidential candidates they feel will further their interests. Is this proper?
Both Nature and Science this week did extensive reporting on the presidential and vice-presidential candidates. While the magazines and the organizations behind them do not receive tax money directly, they act as the leading voices of scientists who are largely supported by grants, and thus they stand to profit directly from the level of funding a President supports. Natures editorial bluntly stated, The most worrying thing about a McCain presidency is not so much a President McCain as a Vice-President Palin. Their concern was over her opposition to embryonic stem-cell research, and the claim that She is a creationist (but see Evolution News). In fact, Nature went out of its way to point out the differences between Obama and McCain on the issue of intelligent design, quoting Obamas answer with apparent satisfaction: ...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
I beg to differ. There is no shortage of FReepers who accept the Modern Synthesis of Evolutionary Theory yet adamantly oppose Obama.
There are hundreds of scientific societies. Most do not take any political position whatsoever.
IOW, it's fiction.
Thanks for the ping!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.