[quote=@j8cob] Abraham Lincoln was a creationist despite the fact that the Theory of Evolution was a thing two years before he became President. The facts and evidence were out there and he still believed in the Bible's story. Would you say he was an inept President because of his disbelief of modern (at the time) science? Or would you say that, in spite of this, he was able to lead the US effectively and bring it through the darkest hour of its history? Lincoln isn't the only President to have believed in creation after the Theory of Evolution was realized. Grover Cleveland, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, to name a few. I think that it had very little impact on how "good" of a President it made people. The denial of creationism among our Presidents didn't become common practice until over a hundred years after the Theory of Evolution. It isn't far-fetched to presume that one's beliefs on the topic of evolution have little or even no effect on their ability to lead. Some of the best leaders throughout world history were absolutely terrible in their understanding of the sciences of their times. There are far more important and relevant qualities to determine a good leader. [/quote] Right I'm back, time to adress this. [b] Historical Context[/b], 2 years after the theory of evolution it was a new stange and yes blasphemous thing, the shit people got back then for not following a very narrow belief in christianity was social suicide, and sometimes criminal. There is no way Abraham Lincoln could have run as president let alone been a politician. And at the time, this theory was not widely accepted and overall the population were less scientfiically informed and skepticism ESPECIALLY into religous doctrine was not encouraged in public or private schools. In short Lincoln was a good president FOR HIS TIME but to compare the merits of a man born nearly 210 years ago, and who lead the country during a civil war in times of the most social unrest the country has ever seen to Ben Carson running for president in 2016 is asanine at best. Whatever way you split it, in MODERN TIMES a leader of the modern world needs to be logical, rational and at least somewhat skeptical. Denying overwhelming scientic evidence in favour of a fringe interpretation of the old testament is not an example of those qualities. I dont care if hes a fucking brain surgeon, its irrelevant to being a political leader. Its only ONE academic field, you can be a master economist but suck at english literature, try to look at the bigger picture.