Goodyear did not help by refusing to answer the question, saying that a question about his religious belief: "I am a Christian, and I don't think anybody asking a question about my religion is appropriate."

His allegedly not believing in Evolution quickly made headlines in the Globe and Mail and his “gaffe” was widely discussed in newspapers across the country. Even today, as I am writing this article, I was reading Karen Selick talking about the irrelevance of the Science and Technology profolio in the federal government.

In my opinion, the whole issue was a fiasco.

First, there is Mr. Goodyear's response to a mean-spirited question. Given Mr. Goodyear's years' of experience in the House of Commons, he should know better that you should think twice about bringing up the question of religion, especially evangelical Christianity, in front of G & M reports or any reporters for that matter. They would love a story exposing a scandal about some evangelical Christian anywhere on the planet, the juicier the better.

Mr. Goodyear, following some ill advices, fuelled the fire by quickly retracting his comments and affirming his belief in evolution. This is like waving the white flag before putting up a fight. The report clearly initiated a fight and if you agreed on it by bringing up the EC question, you should follow through by winning the fight.

But the question is: Is there any better way other than waving the white flag? He should have quote the Liberal Science Critic Marc Garneau's statement that one's religious belief should be irrelevant to our’s job as a minister of the government.

How about the charge: This time it is relevant, because he is the science minister, the one in charge of making decisions on numerous projects. I find this charge either dishonest, ignorant, or simply misleading.

We, Canadians, love to think that our politicians are calling the shots in the affairs of the nations, affairs large and small. But in fact, they have at best a small role in making decisions in how the nation is run. This is especially true for particular decisions on individual projects and proposals. The Minister, in modern day governance, has increasingly taken the role of salesperson for the department and the government, selling and defending government policies to the Canadian public. In reality, to say that since the Science Minister believes in some form of Creationism he would be unfit to make fair decisions in funding considerations is ridiculous. It is equivalent to saying that if the minister's view on particular theories of science would be significant to his performance on the job as a minister. This is like saying one's belief in the Big Bang is necessary or significant in one's performance as a minister. For the charge can then be made if he does not believe in the Big Bang, he would be biased in making funding decisions.
But Big Bang is only a theory, not an established truth in science! This will bring us to the really important question: When has science become a religion?

The question posted to Mr. Goodyear was “Do you believe in the Science of Evolution?” This is not a question that is to be answered at all, for the simple fact that one does not “believe” in a scientific matter. The minister should quickly admonish the report about her scientific knowledge. In science, one makes postulates, does experiments, arrives at theories, and considers the theories as adequate and verifiable, until counter theories are found. In matter of physical science or biological sciences, there are no truths to believe in, but only verifiable theories to be entertained. If you ask me whether I entertain the theory of evolution as an adequate scientific theory, my answer would be …. But whether my position on this theory, or other theories for that matter, is entirely irrelevant to my position as a minister. For funding decisions are made by committees comprising of competent scientists who examine individual proposals as scientific proposals in their own rights. Thank you very much.

The mean spirit attack cleverly set up the clash as one between two religions, the Evolution of Religion vs. the religion of Evangelical Christianity.

I don't even want to go into the question whether Creationism is true. That is besides the question. The question is about turning Evolution into a religion, or an ideology, and a censorship razor to ridicule people who do not ascribe to that religion or ideology.

That's “religious persecution!”

The tactic is:

1. Do you believe in Evolution?

2. The answer is expected to be no since Goodyear is an Evangelical Christian and believes in Creationism.

3. If he states his belief in creationism, he would be attacked as being so background or anti-science that he would lose his credibility as a minister of science and technology.

4. If Goodyear expressed his belief in evolution, he would then be challenged about his alleged belief in creationism. This would still undermine his integrity and credibility as a public figure.

5. If Goodyear refused to answer the question, which he did, he would be attacked as such, as refusing to answer such a simple question that any scientist would have no problem answering. This would then raise question about his credential as the minister of science and technology.

6. It turns out that Goodyear did refuse to answer the question, citing it is a matter of personal and religious conviction and has no relevance to his pro-folio as minister of science and technology.

7. This provides a field day for the liberal media to attack the minister about his qualification to be a minister of science and technology.

The crux of the matter is

Later he retracted and stated that he believed in evolution and hoped the matter would go away quietly. It made headlines and hosts of pundits joined in denouncing the minister's response.

The underlying assumption allowing the journalist to launch this line of attack is that for a Minster of Science and Technology must hold belief in evolution: Do you believe in Evolution?

Evolution is absolute truths that must be believed by any respectable leaders in society, including the minister of science and technology.

If Goodyear does not believe in Evolution, which is the truth of science, how then can he be qualified to serve as Minister of Science and Technology?