Who will/would you vote for?

[Kaiser of Arabia]

I'm Catholic too.
Also, Kerry says he's catholic but he belives in evolution which makes him what rappers and ghetto-shiznit people call a poser.
And his wife is Mrs. Botox of the Year.
-Capo

[GoldenKnightX2]

If I could vote I would vote for anyone but bush.

[Sjakihata]

Capo,

Find me some priests or acedemics who studied theology that does NOT believe in evolution theory, they are few. In denmark, almost all priests or theology scholars acknowledges evolution, it is the normal man on the ground that claims god created the world in a couple of days. It all comes down to how your read the bible, literaly (=fundamentalist) or more casually in a metaphoric way.

fundamentalist trend is getting pretty old and outdated.

*disclaimer, Im just putting forth evidence, nothing except the last line is my opinion.

[Sardo]

On the topic: if I were an American, I'd vote Kerry, because in my extremely humble opinion, he is the lesser of two evils. Bush has done nothing, and I truly mean nothing at all, to give me even the slightest impression that he does what he does for the good of his own country, let alone the rest of the world.
I'm not sure about Kerry but there's just no other option, I guess. Lucky me for not having to cast my vote over there.

About the other stuff:

Which has its flaws... and you admitted, it is a theory. That would make Kerry the dumb one, wouldn't it? Believing, putting faith in, what is just a theory.
By the way, I'm Catholic and I don't believe this "evolution theory" that is so highly esteemed by apparantly you and Kerry. Not that has anything to do with this discussion.

Firstly, I don't see how being Catholic would imply that you can't accept the theory of evolution, as this quote seems to suggest (perhaps unintentionally). I used to be a Catholic (then I grew up ~:p ; that was quite literally the way of it though: as a kid, I was a believer, but as I grew older, I stopped being religious, so no offence intended to Catholics ), and yet I never believed a single word of Genesis to reflect actual facts.

Secondly, about it being 'just a theory', I'd like to post here a very small part of a post, made a long, long time ago on another messageboard far, far away, which deals with just that.

“Evolution is ‘Only a Theory™’”:

(I trademarked the phrase because it’s so common, and because it reflects such a complete misunderstanding of basic science. I want a dime every time some Creationist utters the phrase from now on. I should be able to retire soon on the proceeds.)

People often use the word “theory” to mean a “guess.” This is not what the word means within the sciences. A scientific theory is a thoroughly-tested and well-supported explanation for some observed phenomenon. It is not a guess. It is (in principle) falsifiable, but has not yet been falsified. It is testable and has been thoroughly tested, but has not yet failed the tests. It is predictive, and its key predictions have not been found to be false.

Anyone who claims that evolution is “only a theory,” as if this was somehow evidence that it’s not correct is demonstrating complete ignorance of what the word “theory” means in the sciences. It is, after all, “only a theory” that the Earth is a planet that orbits a star we call the Sun. It is a very well-supported theory, however. So is the theory of evolution – indeed, with the possible exception of quantum mechanics, it is the most thoroughly-tested and well-supported theory in any of the branches of science.

I will, therefore, gladly adhere to just a theory, if you don't mind.

(The entire post can be found here, and is rather long. Don't let the fact that it's in fact a Tolkien fansite scare you away, the philosophy forum there is... interesting. ~:p )

[Sardo]

I see I made a bit of a mistake in the above post, and can't go back to edit it. Obviously, the second quote is meant to begin at “Evolution is ‘Only a Theory™’” and not just at the last paragraph.
My apologies for that little slip-up.