Sarah Palin's Big Bad Creationism

By Nathan Schneider, AlterNet. Posted September 9, 2008.

When John McCain announced his intention to make a freshman -- and female -- Alaska Governor the next vice president on the eve of the Republican convention, the liberal media conspiracy went predictably haywire. The litany of revelations about Sarah Palin only grows as time goes on. And though it has been overshadowed by teenage pregnancies and doctored photographs, one question has got the lattes shaking in a great many progressive hands: is Sarah Palin a creationist?

The Los Angeles Times called her that outright. Newsweek, the Boston Globe, and the New York Times were more cautious, reporting that Palin supports teaching creationism alongside evolution in public schools. But even this isn't quite right. While, in a 2006 gubernatorial debate , she may have declared herself "a proponent of teaching both," she backed down somewhat in a subsequent interview: "I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum." All she's asking, it seems, is that students not be suspended for asking a question about God.

Palin went on to say that her father was a science teacher and taught her about "his theories of evolution." When pushed for her own conclusions, she admitted only, "I believe we have a creator." Sorting through her equivocations, creationist organizations like Answers in Genesis and the Discovery Institute are still reluctant to declare her one of their own.

In contrast, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have made their positions on evolution clear, even while reaching out to religious voters. Clinton is "shocked" by creationism advocates. "One of our gifts from God," she adds, "is the ability to reason." For Obama, "it's a mistake to try to cloud the teaching of science with theories that frankly don't hold up to scientific inquiry."

Palin's maneuvers, in fact, are nothing new for the McCain campaign. As his presidential bid got rolling in '05 and '06, John McCain expressed openness to "intelligent design" theory, a recent phenomenon that dresses creationism in a lab coat. While admitting, "I happen to believe in evolution," he insisted (incorrectly) that many scientists believe intelligent design deserves a fair hearing. While at first suggesting that all positions should be presented, in the same breath he concludes that the most extreme creationism should "probably not" be taught in science class. In 2007, McCain appeared at an event sponsored by the Discovery Institute, the leading cadre promoting intelligent design. Like Palin, he offers only mixed messages.

At the Republican convention, Katie Couric asked Cindy McCain about creationism. She replied, "I think both sides should be taught in schools. I think the more children have a frame of reference and an opportunity to read and know and make better decisions and judgments when they are adults."

What makes Palin seem different are all the videos circulating on YouTube of her thoroughly typical Pentecostal church in Wasilla, Alaska. Raised as she was amidst all that praising, praying, and hellfire-fearing, some worry, she might actually believe this stuff. James Dobson, one of the country's most influential evangelicals, had refused to support John McCain until Palin hit the scene. "If I went into the polling booth today, I would pull the lever for John McCain," he declared days later. Like many social conservatives who were unsure about the GOP ticket, he caught the Palin bug.

On the evolution question, too, Palin's ambiguity reads as sincerity. That kind of doublespeak has been requisite for talking about creationism at least since 1986, when the Supreme Court refused to allow "creation science" in public science classrooms. Soon after, much of the creationist movement recast itself as intelligent design. ID, as it is dubbed, exalts unknowing to a science. Rather than finding explanations for what we see in nature, it fixates on what remains unexplained and speculates on how a higher power might be the cause. Though nearly all its advocates are Christians, many say that in principle their ideas could point to super-intelligent extraterrestrials as much as God the Father.

Agreeing to Disagree

Beyond evolution controversies, ambiguity has been a defining feature of American Christianity recently. Instead of the endless arguments that once gave birth to the country's thousands of splintered denominations, the late twentieth century saw a rallying around the fundamentals of biblical faith that most -- conservatives, at least -- could agree on. Arcane yet once-important questions about the nature of Christ and the status of prophecy gave way to absolute certainties like the need for school prayer and the wretchedness of abortion. When the Republican Party embraced this new voting block, states' rights and libertarian economics became part of the consensus too.

See more stories tagged with: religion, john mccain, creationism, intelligent design, james dobson, sarah palin

Nathan Schneider lives in New York City and writes about religion. He blogs at The Row Boat.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »