This story has been removed

Todd Akin's string of hits continue, this time saying that evolution, which, at its core, is all about science, and has been scientifically proven, is not "even a matter of science."  He made the statement when speaking at a Tea Party yesterday. (h/t Think Progress)

I don’t see it as even a matter of science because I don’t know that you can prove one or the other. That’s one of those things. We can talk about theology and all of those other things but I’m basically concerned about, you’ve got a choice between Claire McCaskill and myself. My job is to make the thing there. If we want to do theoretical stuff, we can do that, but I think I better stay on topic.
This of course comes on the heels of House Science Committee member Paul Broun calling evolution, embryology and the Big Bang "lies straight from the pit of hell."

Speaking as a believer, there is nothing inconsistent in both believing in G-d and accepting the scientific fact of evolution.  First, one must understand that the "six days" spoken of in Genesis are not six days as we understand them.  They could easily be billions of years because time, as we conceive it, did not yet exist then.  Second, taking the Creation story as a metaphor, rather than literally, yields a narrative that, from my perspective, at least, is remarkably similar to the overall scientific narrative.

The literalism espoused by people such as Akin and Broun is completely antithetical to what I believe and to the tradition I was raised in.  One cannot properly learn and understand the Bible without also learning and reading and understanding the commentaries on the Bible.  For me, that means not only reading the words of the text, but also what Rashi and the Rambam (Maimonides) say about that text.  It means applying my own critical thinking skills.  It is exactly that which allows me to be both a believer and accept evolution as what it is — scientific fact.

As for the "theoretical" Akin speaks of, he didn't seem to have a problem when making his outrageous comments about "legitimate" rape or his outrageous suggestions that doctors perform abortions on women who aren't even pregnant.  Of course, it could just be that the "theoretical" is not to be discussed, while the outrageous and bizarre put forward by him are to be accepted as truth and not the lies they actually are.

The saddest part is that the race, somehow, remains competitive.  How is that even possible?

Your Email has been sent.