StG

Individuals are infinitely variable in their beliefs. For example, it is hardly controversial to state that Baptist Church doctrine rejects evolution. Yet I know people who describe themselves as Baptists who have no difficulty with evolution.

So, no, I do not claim to know what an INDIVIDUAL believes about evolution based on his religious denomination. If that is what you mean by "pigeon holing" I plead "not guilty".

On the other hand I suspect that MOST people who profess to be Baptists would reject evolution just as I suspect that MOST people who self-identify as Muslims would have difficulty stomaching the notion that humans share a common ancestry with dogs, apes and pigs.

However, StG, I come back to the comment I made in my first post on this thread. In my experience the people who have the greatest difficulties with evolution are Lefties who purport to be atheists. They find the IMPLICATIONS of human evolution hard to accept.

Dear stevenlmeyer,

It's standard Marxist theory to accept evolution in human development up to a point. After humans develop a social matrix Marxist theory takes over and replaces evolution. Humans are then supposed to be sufficiently plastic so that our evolutionary history can be disregarded in the creation of a new society. Of course not all lefties are Marxists.

Graham: "
Evolution is a core belief of Catholicism, the largest Christian denomination. Anglicans (my brand) accept it, as do Uniting Church. Not sure about the Orthodox churches".

Congratulations on the wonderfully black and white world you live in. Evolution is not even a "core belief" among evolutionists; it's the best "theory" to date that accounts for the "subtle" diversity of species and their success or failure in the world.
If it is a "core belief" of the institutional religions, then they've bastardised it; it's undergone a great deal of revision over the years and will undergo a great deal more (it's the same with AGW btw; it's not black and white, though it's definitely looking grey!).
But I don't believe it is, "core" that is; I don't believe the vast majority of the priests, or their "flocks" "believe" in it (though who cares if they do "accommodate" it within their "purview"?). The mainstream churches are institutions precisely because they are "adaptable"--they're chameleons, parasites; able to adapt symbiotically with whichever earthly power is most likely to prevail; their primary function is to support hegemony.
One has at least to respect the loony fundies for their sincerity--their stupendous credulity. The mainstream churches are as worldly and as cynical as any government, more so! (my uncle was the bishop of Nottingham byw, the established church of course, supped with the Queen--I could tell you some stories! Nothing that would shock of course; we're all desensitised to the evils of the mainstream churches by now).
As for Rudd, Howard et al, they may of course believe in the merit of their "convictions", though I doubt it--more likely they believe in the sincerity of their hubris (an easy accomplishment). But the truth is, they know how to harness the "popular" electoral/electrical current.
The mainstream churches also "believe" in AGW, do they not?

Is there anything left in the world that some people won't divide into left and right / athiest and thiest?

To suggest that people who hold a "left" wing view on some matters (and who decides what's left, right or centre anyway?) - must automatically be athiests - is pure gibberish.

Are there no right-wing athiests in the world?

I thought Jesus was executed for speaking out against authority.

I know of several right-wing extremist groups who claim to be doing God's work but I think they would be in the minority.

Since Christianity has about 30,000 separate sub-groups - http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_meta.htm - I'm not surprised there is no consensus on evolution.

Hindus have their own creation beliefs too but they don't seem to be making any noise about the alternative.

wobbles,

You're right, and I agree. Some people are just more comfortable if they have somewhere to place you in their order of things. Maybe this stems from Universities or something, I don't know, but some people are REALLY OCD about having somewhere to place you. Possibly it's a sort of elitist thing where if you're labelled it makes it easier to look down on you. To me it's like the Astrology of Sociology with Libra, Scorpio etc etc defining everything about you, where partially they are right in some respects but it doesn't allow variations in beliefs based on experiences and personality.

Just a quick question, given Graham's assertion that Christianity is not anti-science:

Why is Creationism/Intelligent Design being taught in schools, such as throughout Queensland?

This mash-up of mythology and misinformation is undermining the concept of science - our children deserve better.