2012 Election: Where GOP Presidential Candidates Stand On Evolution (PHOTOS)

Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry hasn't been shy about his views on evolution.

He caused a stir this month when he told a young boy at a campaign stop that evolution is just a "theory that's out there" and that it has "got some gaps in it." A few days later, he voiced skepticism again when he told a supporter that "God is how we got here."

Perry isn't the only GOP candidate to have made controversial remarks about evolution, however. Below is a slideshow highlighting each Republican presidential hopeful's views on evolution, creationism and intelligent design:

 

 

Comments

[paulsword]

05:10 PM on 10/12/2011

If one compares the archaeological discoveries that have been made over the past few decades that provide support for Biblical accounts… with the few pieces of bone used to support the hypothesis of evolution… the results show vast differences in the amount of verifiable evidence. From tens of thousands of fragments of “in sinc” scrolls dating back 2,000 years… to recent unearthing of entire cities that correspond perfectly with ancient accounts in the Holy Scriptures… the evidence is overwhelming. These are, in great part, supported by numerous historical accounts and the evidences shown by recent astrological discoveries. If the hypothesis of evolution is allowed to be taught in schools as, in laymens terms… a “theory”, then certainly the Christian’s Holy Bible should be included in public school curriculum as an “unproven” or “inconclusive” study of a Creator (refered to by believers as God)… and Jesus Christ (who has impacted world history more than any other person). The Bible has been the #1 best seller and one of the most important pieces of literature in all of history.

[paulsword]

12:33 AM on 10/13/2011

NOTE: Nowhere did I say it should be taught as a "religion".... or for the purpose of worship. We study the sun and the planets... which some people worship. Much of what we learn about them are "suppositions" and "theories":) Kids are not taught to "worship" them. Egyptian and Greek gods are taught in school... but not for the purpose of "establishing a religion":) The Bible, which has been a #1 best seller since book printing began, is a very important piece of literature... much more important than scores of works that are currently being taught. "Evolution hypothesizers" are STILL very confused over this issue as many of their comments show:)

[Maezeppa]

11:04 AM on 10/13/2011

Evolution is settled science. After an initial flurry of controversy, evolutionary theory has been accepted as true for many long decades. Scientists no longer challenge its validity. The Bible has too much sex and violence to teach in schools. Leave Bible study for the colleges and universities where it belongs.

[indamiddle]

01:19 PM on 09/25/2011

None argument..Evolution and intelligent design don't negate each other,

[n6fb]

02:36 PM on 09/24/2011

ANYONE OF AN INTELLECTUAL DEFICIENCY LARGE ENOUGH TO BELIEVE IN CREATIONISM---NOW CALLED" INTELLIGENT DESIGN" TO MAKE IT A LITTLE LESS BIZARRE-- DOES NOT POSSESS THE MENTAL CAPABILITY TO MAKE DECISIONS REGARDING THIS COUNTRY.

[indamiddle]

01:14 PM on 09/25/2011

I guess Obama would be included in that diatribe.. Anyone who believes this earth and man was a compete accident does not possess the mental capability to run anything

[groucho42]

10:03 PM on 09/12/2011

I love little Rick, wrapped proudly in his ignorance, gets confused about the lesson of Galileo. The astronomer said facts that went against religion must be followed because facts trump belief. Perry claimed that facts should be ignored because Galileo would have followed faith rather than reason. It's a great statement of the hypocrisy rampant in the Republican party.

[Lincster]

04:29 PM on 09/12/2011

Paul Junior the long and short of the existance of God as defined by the Judeo/Christains is that they believe therefore he/she/it exists. That's it. There is absolutely no way to logically prove the existance of God. You can only prove it by faith which really is no proof at all. My four year old believes in Santa so...to him as to Paul Junior he (Santa/God) exists. The rest of PJ's so called argument is just silly. As is a grown-up believing in the creation myth. If it keeps him from hurting himself and others I say good for you. Just don't try and pass it off as anything more than a superstion you really really believe.

[Paul Junior]

11:15 AM on 09/11/2011

The highest level of education in this country... at Harvard, Princeton, Yale, and in England at Oxford... was founded on a belief in God... as was America!!!­:) It goes without saying... education in public schools was ALSO based on a belief in that same God!!!;) Most atheists and their cohorts try to deny this fact by pointing to "separatio­n of church and state"... which was originally intended to PROTECT the freedom of worship by prohibitin­g the establishm­ent of a "national religion".­.. and by forbidding the government from denying our right to worship altogether­!!!:) Unfortunat­ely, by misinterpr­eting the spirit of the Constituti­on and by catering to godless peoples and organizati­ons, our rights as citizens have been diminished significan­tly over the past half-centu­ry!!!:) Considering the present condition of our weakened economy and military, and overall complacency... obvious to most is the need to return to a spiritual dependence on our Creator!!!:) As our President is at this very moment reading Psalm 46 from the Holy Bible in the 9/11 ceremony... I am reminded of this verse:

2 Chronicles 7:14 (KJV)

If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

We should ALL pray for those who do not understand the need to believe in a Holy God!!!:)

[Todd513]

02:00 PM on 09/08/2011

Why don't the intelligent design advocates point out other clear examples of so-called irreducible complexity: the human immunodefficiency virus, the hepatitus B virus, and the influenza virus? Perhaps because it would show that the designer, in addition to being intelligent, was malicious and sadistic.

[Paul Junior]

09:27 PM on 09/08/2011

There are also man-eating alligators and poisonous snakes... it doesn't mean there is not Creator!!!:)

[Paul Junior]

09:34 PM on 09/08/2011

...or that He was malicious and sadistic!!!

[Todd513]

04:19 PM on 09/09/2011

It sure doesn't strengthen the case for an all-loving, benevolent creator. I guess the best we could say is the creator was utterly unconcerned with human well being and suffering.

I sort of get the Christian apologists' arguments about the need for humans to have free will so they could freely choose to be good - thus there has to be the capacity for doing evil in the world. But that is a far cry from deliberately creating entities (be they man-eating alligators or deadly viruses) solely to inflict suffering on the young and the innocent.

[Maezeppa]

05:09 PM on 09/07/2011

Evolution is a fact. Evolutionary theory correctly describes the general principles of evolution's mechanics. Hypotheses are a preliminary prediction about something; they aren't in the same ballpark as theories and laws. A theory is "The grandest synthesis of a large and important body of information about some related group of natural phenomena". A law just refers to a body of observations that can be quantitatively summarized by a short mathematical (or in some cases, verbal) statement. A scientific law and a scientific theory are both a statement of fact.

[indamiddle]

01:18 PM on 09/25/2011

Evolution and intelligent design can exist together,

[Maezeppa]

01:42 PM on 09/25/2011

Sure. If somebody wants to believe God guides evolution, they can be my guest. Just don't call it science.

[MarketAnarchist101]

06:07 PM on 10/14/2011

A theory can be disproven.. just because there is a theory that is generally accepted doesn't mean the theory was right. There have been many instances where theories have been proven wrong and science goes in a different direction.

[Maezeppa]

08:04 PM on 10/14/2011

Not exactly. What is true is that science structures itself in a way that information is gathered and conclusions are drawn in a manner that will allow for the possiblity that new information could come along and change the picture. Well-established scientific theories aren't ever "proven wrong" or discarded, though. What happens is that the new information simply places the existing knowledge in sharper and better context. Let me give you an example. Newton's first law worked reliably and well for a very, very long time. Then Einstein produced the theory of relativity. Did that mean Newton's law was thrown in the trash? No. Einstein's theory simply rewrote and strictly revised Newton's law in such a way that Newton's law still worked just as it had before ... but not everywhere in the universe. Evolutionary theory describes the general principles of evolution. As technology continues to improve, more will be understood about evolution, particularly at the molecular level. But nothing in the literally mountains of evidence in the hundred and fifty years since Darwin changed the fundamentals of evolutionary theory. Any new information simply helps crystallize and clarify how evolution works.

[chessie128]

02:51 PM on 09/07/2011

Evolution should be the controversial issue here instead of Creation. Evolution is not observable. We have never seen an ape change over to a man.

[Drash]

04:20 PM on 09/08/2011

And you never will see "an ape change over to a man", because that's not what evolution entails or says. Species evolve, not individuals.

[dm512]

06:05 PM on 09/08/2011

never seen new life created out of nothing. over a sudden new species that cant be traced back. like a frog with with or a fly with teleport

[Paul Junior]

01:21 AM on 09/05/2011

Hey turtom... You wanna explain how, in your own mind, you differentiate between a "creator" and an "intelligent designer"??? Secondly... you are STILL IN DENIAL over the indisputable fact that... (from Encyclopaedia Britannica)...

"Firmly denying atheism, Einstein expressed a belief in "Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of what exists." (We Believers ALL know God reveals himself in the harmony of what exists!!!:) And...???

This actually motivated his interest in science, as he once remarked to a young physicist: "I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon­, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details." This proves his central concern was to learn more about God and His Creation!!!:)

Einstein's famous epithet on the "uncertain­ty principle" was "God does not play dice" - and to him this was a real statement about a God in whom he believed. A "God in whom he believed"!!!:) What about this statement do you NOT UNDERSTAND???

A famous saying of his was "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Do you have a problem comprehending this quote as well???!!!

[Maezeppa]

01:39 PM on 09/05/2011

Easy one that I'll be happy to address. The word 'creator' could designate a force of some sort that has no intelligence whatsoever. A creator could also be an incompetent designer, or not a designer at all but merely a magician who brings about objects thoughtlessly, with a finger-snap. Certainly, if one catalogued the some 67,000+ gods and goddesses human imagination has conceived, "intelligence" wasn't ascribed to very many of them. That said, when creationists speak of an "Intelligent Designer", they mean God, of course. ID was invalidated as a scientific theory about 200 years ago, even before Darwin published. It was resurrected in recent decades by conservative right wing politicos who use ID to play wedge politics. It's cynical and it's not science.

[Paul Junior]

02:26 PM on 09/05/2011

A bit of confusion here:) The term "Creator" has been used to indicate a Superior Being who "created CREATION" for many many years...going back to the Holy Scriptures...!!!:) It REQUIRES intelligence...!!!... especially when you look around you and see CREATION!!!... from the tiny atom and human cell to the far reaches of outter space!!! As I said earlier... I am beginning to get to understand the way you think... but please try to stay on target and don't get too far off subject!!! Your comment that disappeared and my reply is as follows: You said, "To assume a "Creator".­.. or "Intellege­nt Designer" exists and then reverse-en­­gineer the universe and all in it to fit the assumption is not allowed in scientific discipline­­". That is EXACTLY what evolutioni­sts do!!! They deny the existence of God... or a Creator... and then they try to support their "BELIEF" by manipulati­ng their hand-full of archeologi­cal findings to support their "THEORIES"­:) Scroll down for more of my reply:) I'll be back later after some barbeque:)

[Maezeppa]

10:43 AM on 09/07/2011

As to people under age 16 being easily "brainwashed" into "believing in" evolution, the Gallup stats you posted the other day demolish your own argument. Because HS dropouts are the least apt to accept evolution, the survey results clearly show that little if any time is given to teaching evolution in elementary or even high schools. Because the overwhelming majority of grad students understand evolution, obviously data that is provided to intelligent, mature adults capable of critical thought is accepted as true. Oh, and by the way, an "unproven fact" is still a fact. Speaking of proof, you keep proving that your claimed credentials and C.V. are false. I'm embarrassed for you because you don't realize how blatant your dishonesty really is.

[Paul Junior]

01:11 PM on 09/07/2011

I am really so sorry Mae:) I apologize for not responding with more cleverly abusive words. :( It seems it is the only language you understand. I have allowed you to finally display your total ignorance in this matter. "Ignorance" as defined as ignoring the factual information supplied to you. I'm only going to do this one time:) I am retired... and I do have time to spend a bit on HP:) However, I DO worry about you and your claim to be a microbiologist. However, it may provide the clue as to why you... and some of the "scientific facts" you spout are so far afield!!!:( Maybe you need to spend more time at work instead of playing on the computer!!!:) CORRECTION: I reviewed the ratios of evolution "believers" correctly. MY POINT WAS... the more flawed information that goes into young skulls full of mush... the more they believe it. After all... the government has control of the system and the liberals control D.C. and the NEA!!!:)... AND most evolution research!!!:(... AND what comments make it on HP:) I trust you will NOT reject this one because of your bias.

[Paul Junior]

05:09 PM on 09/07/2011

Well Well... Mae...!!!:) You have exposed yourself here... posting an answer to a substantive comment you deleted... one of mine... referring to the "brainwashed 16 year old" .. that you even misquoted:) Your reply does not make much sense without the comment you are referring to... the MISSING LINK... !!! Just like an "evolutionist"... hiding some things that don't fit their agenda... and tampering with other findings in order to support their baseless claims that don't make much sense... IF you are a THINKING individual!!!:) Shame on you!!! You are really not quite up to this type of debate on a subject in which you are not at all proficient:)

Tell you what...:) Since a big issue with you is TRUST... and BELIEF... in MY credentials... I will confer with a colleague of mine that has a web site full of just the kind of genetic discoveries and personal animal breeding information that you would... if you were a real biologist... find fascinating!!!:) I will clear it with her and she can provide you with support for my claims. I am afraid I am too high profile to provide personal info to a stranger on the net:) I will be talking with her in the next few days.

[turtom]

02:21 PM on 09/03/2011

By the way, Paul Junior, you make another common debating error. You say Einstein (and other well-known scientists) believe in a creator. You then assume that also means they believe in intelligent design. But the first fact in no way proves the second. One can believe in a creator and still believe in evolution. ID, for the most part, is a Trojan Horse, masquerading as science. It is, in large part, pushed by Christian fundamentalists who want a literal reading of the Bible to somehow be part of the US science curriculum. And this is the same Bible that Einstein referred to as "superstitious stories."

[Paul Junior]

10:26 PM on 09/04/2011

My, My, turtom... Here you go again putting up smoke screens about "Christian fundamentalists" and the Bible again. You must really have had a horrific experience with someone who tried to hang a cross around your neck... or worse!!! Neither of those terms are necessary for this discussion:) I'm afraid you still seem determined to excuse away Einstein's regard for "God"... "I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon­, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details." He further stated, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." And whatever else you can say about him he was a lifelong believer in understand­ing the nature of God through science. (Encyclopaedia Britannica)... and might I add, understanding science through the nature of God!!!:) Please... explain the difference... in your mind... between a "creator" and an "intelligent designer". I think that is the first place to start if we are going to make headway in this exchange:) Again, STAY FOCUSED ON ONE ISSUE AT A TIME... PLEASE!!!:)

[Paul Junior]

01:21 AM on 09/05/2011

Hey turtom... I am afraid you are in SERIOUS DENIAL!!!:) Check my reply posted above!!!:)

[turtom]

02:12 PM on 09/03/2011

My, Paul Junior, such a long post to say nothing. I understand the concept of claiming victory and leaving the battlefield. But your accusation that I am somehow off-topic rings hollow. Much of what I wrote was in answer to your posts, most recently the specious claim that morally substantive people learn their morality by observing Christian behavior. You do not answer that because the facts do not favor your argument.

[Paul Junior]

10:34 PM on 09/04/2011

My, My, turtom... you can only draw the conclusion that I said "nothing"... IF you ignore each issue I listed and described:) You seem to have a disconnect with reality and responsibility. I have already exlained to you... I have NO desire to enter into an epic discussion about Ancient World Religions!!! That is NOT the subject of the article OR this debate. Some other time maybe:) Right now... AGAIN... STAY FOCUSED AND BE PITHY, SPECIFIC, AND FACTUAL!!!

[Maezeppa]

09:08 PM on 09/06/2011

Your "issues" are inconsequential and/or erroneous.

[turtom]

10:24 AM on 09/03/2011

Also, Paul Junior, you completely ignore fact that although many Christians demonize atheists, studies of atheists conclude they are highly moral, highly educated, more knowledgeable about the Bible, have lower rates of crime, divorce, drug dependence and other social behaviors that generally indicate low ethical standards.

To say that they learned right from wrong by association with Christians, a group with whom atheists completely disagree on many issues is ludicrous. It is also interesting to note that other studies of social trends in America broken down by religion and geography show that the Bible Belt, stretching through the southern states into the mid-West have much higher rates for divorce, child abuse, school dropouts obesity, STDs, criminal activity, drug and alcohol abuse, and pornography usage. These trends, tracked over time, correspond to an area of the country that also rates highest for church attendance, religious affiliation and self-proclaimed adherence to Christian morality. Apparently there is a disconnect between Christians talking the talk and walking the walk. Trends in Massachusetts on the other hand, a state that ranks high in numbers of self-proclaimed atheists and generally a stronghold of liberal theology, are exactly opposite of those in the fundamentalist and God-fearing south.

[Paul Junior]

10:43 PM on 09/04/2011

turdom!!! PLEASE...!!!:( More complaints about Christians...!!!... and such CONCEIT!!! Wow!!!... and you say you are not RANTING!!! Just stick to the subject....!!! FOCUS FOCUS FOCUS!!! Really!!!:( Try answering my questions for a change... then ask me some questions pertinent to the ISSUES... "CREATION" and "INTELLIGENT DESIGN"...!!!:(

[Paul Junior]

10:44 PM on 09/04/2011

Ooops!!! Sorry for the typo. My mistake.

[Paul Junior]

04:14 AM on 09/03/2011

ISSUE #1: The GOP presidential candidates featured in this article have voiced varying degrees of belief in “creation” and/or “evolution”. Their faiths are outlined therein.

ISSUE #2: Evolution is a science that generally excludes the belief in God… or the Creator. However, some believe a creator “allows” evolution to take place. The belief that “evolution” means man evolved from a lower life form is a total contradiction to the basic teachings of Christ, the Holy Bible, and Christianity.

ISSUE #3: There is absolutely NO PROOF that man ever evolved from a lower life form… or that any species in nature “evolved” from another “species” that could subsequently produce offspring.

ISSUE #4: It is a proven fact that Einstein, Newton, Galileo, Darwin and hundreds of other scientists, philosophers, and writers… many recipients of the Nobel Prize… are believers in a “Creator”. Many are or were Christians.

ISSUE #5: Self-proclaimed atheists comprise an estimated maximum of 5% of the population in America. An atheist does not believe in any sovereign power… or “creator”. If there was NO God… there would be NO atheists!!!:)

YOU MAY REVIEW MY POSTS IN THIS GROUP OF COMMENTARIES TO FIND LINKS THAT WILL TAKE YOU TO PROOFS OF THE ABOVE STATEMENTS. I HAVE A LIFE BEYOND HUFFPOST.. SO DEBATE THESE ISSUES ALL YOU LIKE. FOR NOW… I AM PAUL JUNIOR… GOOD DAY:)

[Angel1999]

10:17 AM on 09/03/2011

"The belief that “evolution­” means man evolved from a lower life form is a total contradict­ion to the basic teachings of Christ, the Holy Bible, and Christiani­ty."

This is unsupported by facts. The links you have posted do not provide "proof", just teleological handwaving.

"There is absolutely NO PROOF that man ever evolved from a lower life form… or that any species in nature “evolved” from another “species” that could subsequent­ly produce offspring."

Every bit of information we have on evolution (~300,000 peer reviewed research articles on PubMed alone) provides proof of all these things.

"If there was NO God… there would be NO atheists"

This isn't self-evident. Atheists exist because of RELIGION, not because of the existence or non-existence of God.

[Paul Junior]

11:57 PM on 09/04/2011

Angel... The links were PROOF of which scientists believed in God... or Creator... or an Intelligent Designer!!! Not proof of the validity of Christianity!!! Your mistake:)

"Every bit of information" (300,000 strong)!!! Where... What... !!! "Proof of ALL these things". Please provide SOME kind of evidence... description... proof...!!!:)

Religion...??? Excuse Me???!!!...

ATHEISM is the [LACK OF THE BELIEF IN A DIETY]... (www.atheists.org)

DEITY: GOD; SUPREME BEING... (Merriam-Webster)

Hence.... No God... No Atheist:)

[Maezeppa]

12:19 PM on 09/03/2011

By definition, all science "excludes a belief in God". So does baseball. So do a lot of things. It was only when people stopped saying, "God sent the plague" that real medical advances began to be made. It was only when people stopped saying, "God shows his wrath with lightening bolts" that electricity began to be harnessed. As to evolution, 100% of literally mountains of evidence shows that the lineage of all living forms on todays earth, humans included, can be traced back to the same primitive unicellular organisms present on earth over 3 billion years ago. Case closed.

[Paul Junior]

10:51 PM on 09/03/2011

HUH???!!! Unbelievable:) You need to get together with Angel and turtom:) You all could probably get a spot on the Comedy Channel:) I think this is the squirreliest post I have ever read. Oh... I get it...!!! You are demonstrating how squirrels can evolve from humans!!! Good job:)

[Paul Junior]

03:24 AM on 09/03/2011

Well turtom… I suppose we could carry this battle on for days… but since I retired from this forum three days ago… and only re-entered in order to attempt to enlighten you on a couple of issues… one of which you have herein apologized for in making inaccurate comments out of hasty reading and analysis of the CENTRAL element of our disagreement. I refuse to waste valuable time in pointless debate with you due to your obvious desire to cover over the original point of this article and strike out on rabbit trails that would result in endless debate!!! Let me simply outline for you the issues that have led to nearly 10,000 entries so far so you will be able to focus on the actual subject of the article. Trust me… I would love to debate you at length on Christianity, atheism, creation, evolution, Einstein, and Darwin…!!! I am NOT particularly interested in a long discussion in Ancient World Religions. Therefore, I will limit this post to the primary subject… not to “ignore” “difficult” issues… but more to resist delving into the deeper and broader subject matter which you have so ambitiously introduced into this discussion. Obviously, you cannot comprehend the basic points of the HuffPost article… so let’s just confine our exchange to that concept and focus on our differences therein!!!:)... and THANKS again for the admission of your mistake:)

[Maezeppa]

12:23 PM on 09/03/2011

It's interesting how, when they have been beaten, Creationists suddenly have "more important things" to attend to. As the old joke goes, debating a Creationist is like playing chess with pigeons. The pigeon flies in, knocks all the pieces down, leaves a few droppings on the board, declares himself the winner and then flies home to brag about his "victory".

[Paul Junior]

01:45 PM on 09/03/2011

Beg Pardon...:)... but I left you and the other two folks who are actively seething with hate and abuse toward Christians... while erroneously accusing me of the same... with not only comments... but valid links that provide ample PROOF of my claims:) I also requested answers to MY questions concerning your "belief" in evolution... and YOU and turtom and Angel have refused to address those questions!!! NOW you accuse me of "flying home":) I'm still here...!!! You merely have produced not ONE PROOF of your claims about evolution or answered ONE QUESTION I have asked!!!:) Until you do... I have NOTHING else to respond to!!!:)