I was going to post a link to this earlier but settled for sadly rolling my eyes.
The really tragic thing is that this seems another backwards step for a country that the best part of 100 years ago had such a progressive leader in Mustafa Kemal Atatürk:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mustafa_Kemal_Atatürk
The article mentions they introduce a law many years after his death criminalising insults towards him. I bet he would have disapproved of that law, too! :/
What I don't understand is the inability for evolution and creationism to be combined. For example, why could God not have created the universe using what we understand as a big bang and formed it over time, even letting creatures evolve in their own ways as part of the creation? Genesis is a Jewish writing and one that both Christians and Muslims use as basis for creation. The Jews are fond of their stories to illustrate points and its likely the early parts of the bible let's say pre Moses are passed word of mouth. So its pretty certain (though obviously not 100%) that the 7 day creation is a story to illustrate creation of all the different parts of the world.
To clarify as well, I believe fully in God (Christian) but appreciate most people on here don't.
Ever seen Noah, starring Russell Crowe and Jennifer Connelly? There's a scene where he combines Creationism and Evolution all in one mad montage. It's bonkers and great, all at the same time. From the above, you'd probably enjoy it.
Why "obviously not 100%" certain that the world was not made in 7 days?
Minor and petty quibble!
It took six days to make the world and all the things on it. The seventh day God put her feet up.
I'm in favour of that. Being religious shows the inability to think critically and should therefore instantly bar that individual from public office as they are not fit to make sensible decisions.
Two flaws immediately apparent in the above. One - there are plenty of religious people who think critically and historically many of our great thinkers have been actively religious. Isaac Newton was a deeply religious man, for example. Two - that's an appallingly inconsistent benchmark. By it, you would ban some person who prays regularly but makes all their economic policy decision based on evidence, whilst allowing in some dogmatic and committed marxist who disregarded all evidence in favour of ideology. As one example of how being religious is far, far from where you should start if you're going to start disqualifying people from public office.
