[metmom]

My vote would certainly not hinge on that question. I think that there are far too many more serious issues facing the country and that it would depend on his/her position on other issues. If their position on every single other issue was identical, then it would but in reality, that's not going to happen.

A presidential contender's personal opinion on the subject is just that. The president is really limited in just what he personally can do about issues. Aside from appointing Supreme Court justices, the way the system of government is set up, precludes one man from taking power and enforcing his agenda. He may push for it, but that still doesn't mean it's going to happen.

As a practical matter, I really don't think that scenario is going to come up. From what I've seen, most candidates are not either/or as far as only creation or only evolution; Sarah Palin being a case in point. Her faith and conservative Christian position are well known and yet even she doesn't advocate only one or the other. She's for allowing both.

As is the case for most creationists that I know of. The problem is it seems like the evo camp is the one most often championing for only one; that is evolution. About everyone else is for allowing ID/creation also, not instead of. I have no doubt that there are creationists who would like to see only creation taught in schools, but if you follow the debates, most of the push is for both.

I noticed an interesting thing about your questions. That is that you asked ....

Do you view this debate as critical (evo v. ID)? Or to put it very simply: Would you vote for someone who is 100% behind evolution and thinks ID/Creationism is solely a religous issue and doesn’t belong in the classroom?

Of course the opposite applies for evo fans. Would they vote for someone who rejects evolution and wants ID/Creationism taught in public school?

It seems like you asked two different questions. Did you mean in the second question whether they would vote for someone who only wants creation/ID taught in the classroom and thinks that evolution should not be taught? Or did you mean to ask if either side would be willing to accept all three (evo,ID,creation) being taught?

[strider44]

I guess my motivation is simple. These Crevo threads can be very intense and always bring passions from both sides.

I’m trying to gage wether the feelings on both sides are strong enough for people to alter their presidential votes, like say pro-life v. pro-choice positions would.

I should have phrased the questions better. I don’t believe that many people want evolution totally out of schools. If they do, that’s a little extreme. So I guess it comes down to teaching just evolutionary theory or evolutionary theory with other theories also presented.

So Freepers out there, is this a litmus-test issue? Maybe we should start that question as a thread.

For me:

Pro-gun (you get my vote) Anti gun you don’t
Pro-military - yes, anti - no
Pro Life - yes , pro choice no

Pro Creationism/ID , anti evolution - I’ll let it slide if you’re solid on everything else.

[whattajoke]

My vote would certainly not hinge on that question. I think that there are far too many more serious issues facing the country and that it would depend on his/her position on other issues. If their position on every single other issue was identical, then it would but in reality, that's not going to happen.

A presidential contender's personal opinion on the subject is just that. The president is really limited in just what he personally can do about issues. Aside from appointing Supreme Court justices, the way the system of government is set up, precludes one man from taking power and enforcing his agenda. He may push for it, but that still doesn't mean it's going to happen.

I completely and totally agree.