A majority of Republicans reject evolution because evolution is simply not scientific - it's a philosophy used to interpret data in a certain way, but it is one which relies upon circular reasoning, wishful thinking, and inferences from unsupported speculation. Republicans rightly reject evolution specifically because Republicans are clear-headed people who think for themselves. Evolution is a philosophy for people who unthinkingly believe whatever they were told to believe in the dumbed-down government schools - schools where critical thinking and actual examination of the claims of a theory or belief are never taught.
Think about it, folks. There's a reason the evolutionists hyperventilate at the mere thought that ID or creationism might even be mentioned in a public school, much less included as a part of the curricula. It's because evolutionists are afraid to have to actually put their belief system up on trial and have it questioned. Evolution receives much the same hallowed status in American public schools as "scientific socialism" did in Soviet schools - it's a truism, and and any debate must be stifled.
One would think that if evolution were really supported by independent facts and reason, that evolutionists would just be chomping at the bit to pit it against creationism in the schools - what a great way to show the kids how stupid those creationists are, and how superior and correct evolution is. The fact that evolutionists are afraid to do that, and want discussion on the subject limited to a very narrowly defined set of talking points speaks volumes.
Kind of like the philosophy used to interpret actions on Earth to an unseen, undetectable, God.
I have never understood how creationists win by painting science as equivalent to faith. At best, they only create the impression that there are two competing faiths involved. How is that a win?
I'll take a "faith" that has been tested, that has an explained mechanism in DNA, that has massive quantities of evidence to support it, over a faith that points to the empty sky and says, "see, God lives up there".
If science and Christianty are two co-equal faiths, then Christianity loses.
Think about it, folks. There's a reason the evolutionists hyperventilate at the mere thought that ID or creationism might even be mentioned in a public school, much less included as a part of the curricula. It's because evolutionists are afraid to have to actually put their belief system up on trial and have it questioned. Evolution receives much the same hallowed status in American public schools as "scientific socialism" did in Soviet schools - it's a truism, and and any debate must be stifled.
One would think that if evolution were really supported by independent facts and reason, that evolutionists would just be chomping at the bit to pit it against creationism in the schools - what a great way to show the kids how stupid those creationists are, and how superior and correct evolution is. The fact that evolutionists are afraid to do that, and want discussion on the subject limited to a very narrowly defined set of talking points speaks volumes.
Throughout this post you are complaining about science and evolution, and that there is no evidence to support evolution. (That is plainly false.)
On the other hand, you want ID taught as a scientific theory even though it lacks any scientific evidence. Talk about a double standard.
You want critical thinking? Riddle me this. How many designers are/were there? When did the design occur? And please specify the evidence that you use to support your positions.
No, it's because of two reasons. First, a high school kid is as qualified to 'critique' evolution as he is to 'critique' quantum mechanics. Secondly, the twisting, warping and "lying for the Lord" with respect to other branches of science by creationists leaves highschoolers with less education than they started with.