[roger-roger]

Prior to the 1900's....

[Proculation]

Einstein ?

[Zipperfish]

Well, there's a lot of scientists who believe in god, or at least in something greater than they are. I'm one. But that's a little difference than rejecting testable hypotheses and observations in order to maintain internal consistency with your ideology. That is not allowed in science.

[DrJones]

I support the Tories but this is pretty bad. Surely it is relevant that the SCIENCE Minister doesn't believe in evolution. His refusal to answer the question speaks volumes about him. Why don't we just have a convicted criminal be the Justice Minister while we're at it?

Or have the Finance Minister tell us he doesn't believe in accounting?

His beliefs suggest where his priorities lie and where/how he will or won't approve funding for research etc. I am personally unsettled by this knowledge. This is going to be bad optics for the Tories whether they like it or not.

[RUEZ]

Eisensapper Eisensapper:

As long as those beliefs do not effect how he preforms his job.

Yes, that's what I was getting at. I certainly wouldn't support a Jehova's Witness being Minister of Health if he imposed a ban on blood transfusions.

[RUEZ]

DrJones DrJones:

I support the Tories but this is pretty bad. Surely it is relevant that the SCIENCE Minister doesn't believe in evolution. His refusal to answer the question speaks volumes about him. Why don't we just have a convicted criminal be the Justice Minister while we're at it?

Or have the Finance Minister tell us he doesn't believe in accounting?

His beliefs suggest where his priorities lie and where/how he will or won't approve funding for research etc. I am personally unsettled by this knowledge. This is going to be bad optics for the Tories whether they like it or not.

The momment he doesn't do his job properly then you can bitch. Until then what he believes personally is no ones business.

[DrJones]

Isn't that kind of like saying, the fact that I discover my day care worker is a convicted pedophile isn't a reason to not let him watch after my son, it's only when he's done something "for sure" that we fire him?

Surely we can and should consider the likelihood of someone disgracing their job and harming those dependent upon that position when deciding to allow him to keep that job.

[hurley_108]

If a person believes in god, that does not preclude them from doing good science. If he was questioned on "creation" rather than "evolution," then the question was a bad one. It's interesting, though, that he refused to answer the question because he didn't "think anybody asking a question about [his] religion [was] appropriate," rather than refusing to answer based on the simple fact that it was deliberately tangential.

[fifeboy]

ridenrain ridenrain:

Unless I'm mistaken, it's still illegal to discriminate against someone because of their religion. Isn't this exactly what you're doing?

Well then, he should go to the human rights commissions so loved by Lorne Gunter nah

[mtbr]

DrJones DrJones:

Isn't that kind of like saying, the fact that I discover my day care worker is a convicted pedophile isn't a reason to not let him watch after my son, it's only when he's done something "for sure" that we fire him?

.

no

[fifeboy]

Proculation Proculation:

Most famous scientists believed in God.

And in the modern era, evolution and Newtonian Physics. I wonder what people would do if we found out he didn't believe in Physics.

[Zipperfish]

I think the listeriosis outbreak is where the Conservatives would be more vulnerable on the science front. They decided to let the meat industry regulate itself; they advocated, in the US, for less stringent standards for the presence of the listeriosis bacteria; the inquiry into the outbreak is toothless and secretive.

[RUEZ]

DrJones DrJones:

Isn't that kind of like saying, the fact that I discover my day care worker is a convicted pedophile isn't a reason to not let him watch after my son, it's only when he's done something "for sure" that we fire him?

Surely we can and should consider the likelihood of someone disgracing their job and harming those dependent upon that position when deciding to allow him to keep that job.

If he's a convicted pedophile he's already done something wrong. You cannot discriminate in Canada because of religion.

[RUEZ]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

I think the listeriosis outbreak is where the Conservatives would be more vulnerable on the science front. They decided to let the meat industry regulate itself; they advocated, in the US, for less stringent standards for the presence of the listeriosis bacteria; the inquiry into the outbreak is toothless and secretive.

But did that self regulation get put into place before the listeriosis outbreak?

[DrJones]

RUEZ RUEZ:

DrJones DrJones:

Isn't that kind of like saying, the fact that I discover my day care worker is a convicted pedophile isn't a reason to not let him watch after my son, it's only when he's done something "for sure" that we fire him?

Surely we can and should consider the likelihood of someone disgracing their job and harming those dependent upon that position when deciding to allow him to keep that job.

If he's a convicted pedophile he's already done something wrong. You cannot discriminate in Canada because of religion.

Fair enough. I suppose I am having trouble drawing a line between "discriminating based on religion" and "discriminating based on one's beliefs towards science, that are influenced by one's religion."

Maybe that is just splitting hairs. But I am still a bit unsettled by this information.