I’m unclear why “being a creationist” is an issue running for public office? Why would their conclusions about 19th century zoology be a factor in administering social security or running the military? Its the natural selection people who are acting looney: Czar Cass Sunstein wants animals to have lawyers, philosopher Peter Singer likens animal liberation to women’s liberation and wonders aloud how animals can vote.

animal-rights-library.com

I find the creationists a bit tardy on scientific paradigm change but certainly much more stable than the zombies at PETA.

And then or course there’s the problem of reproduction: creationists throughout the world reproduce and evolutionist throughout the world do not. So which is nature selecting for?

And don’t bore me challenging the last statement: 19 of the 20 countries with the lowest birthrates, a rate HALF of that needed to sustain a population, are in Western Europe.