That we are yet again debating evolutionary theory and Earth's origins "” and that candidates now have to declare where they stand on established science "” should be a signal that we are slip-sliding toward governance by emotion rather than reason. But it's important to understand what's undergirding the debate. It has little to do with a given candidate's policy and everything to do with whether he or she believes in God.
That's from Kathleen Parker, a conservative-leaning columnist for the Washington Post. Parker, unlike Perry's Republican fans, also gets
why he probably can't win a national election, in which large swaths of the electorate would prefer that their president keep his religion close and be respectful of knowledge that has evolved from thousands of years of human struggle against superstition and the kind of literal-mindedness that leads straight to the dark ages. Faith and reason are not mutually exclusive, but Perry makes you think they are.
