This was a stupid comment only to the extent that it can be manipulated by the Liberals. Creationism - as a story - is already taught in Catholic schools. It is taught in religion class and understood to be no more than a symbolic and flawed interpretation of the beginning of time. That another religious school (say, a Jewish one), might teach the same thing strikes me as being entirely reasonable. That another religious school (say, some fundamentalist Christian faith) might teach only creationism strikes me as being entirely possible, but I would think that such a school would be denied provincial funding. As is the case currently.

Just one more example, frankly, of how ridiculous our political discourse has become.

Though, the more I think about it...if I were Tory I would simply ask McGuinty if his kids learned creationism in school. They would have. Or ask him if his wife teaches in a school that provides the details of creationism in its ciriculum. She does.

Actually Mike, it really was a stupid comment since Tory implied Creationism could be taught alongside Evolution in Science class. He has since backtracked and said that he meant it to be taught in Religion class.

Nothing wrong with what he has backtracked to, and I agree with everything else you have said, but what Tory said initially was stupid and he got nailed for it.

The quote that I saw made no mention of teaching creationism in science class. Only that it could be a part of the ciriculum. To suggest that this implies that it would be fine to teach this in science class is a bit of a leap, I think.

"It's still called the theory of evolution" narrows the chasm slightly, I'd say — not to the point where I actually believe Tory wants creationism in science class, but to the point where it's a bona fide gaffe (as opposed to so many other things that bear that title). And having taken these strident, discordant positions on religious schooling, I still don't understand why Tory's letting McGuinty make hay with his own nonsensical ones in response.

Chris, I am one of your biggest fans but I think you should read the Nat Posts editorial on this one. As noted in the editorial, we teach Native creationist legends in school, what is wrong with teaching Christian creationist legends? Voters, journalists, pundits, and thinkers such as yourself need to spend more time discussing ideas, and not looking to magnify perceived "gaffes".

...and why in Gods name would you carry water for that demonspawn Warren Kinsella?

This story, for me, is way more about how extraordinarily dishonest our political discourse has become and how unfailingly vapid our media has become.

It's all very sad.

There's nothing wrong with teaching various creation myths in religious studies classes, and I don't think I said there was. The fact that "creationism" is a radioactive word is a political reality, not a logical one, and that's why I expressed shock (as opposed to outright disapproval) at the fact Tory would fall for a question on the topic. That stuff doesn't really interest me, in general, but both sides here are behaving like they're on crack - Tory gaffes (by Canadian political standards); McGuinty ripostes nonsensically; Tory retreats, failing to explore well-signposted avenues of counterattack. That, I find interesting. Anyway, let's all talk about the justice system being a farce now.