Andrew Sullivan notices a moment I’d missed in the recent Republican debate, in which Mike Huckabee is asked to clarify his views on evolution: At the first debate, he’d been one of three candidates to indicate he disbelieved in the theory. Huckabee rather unconvincingly tries to reframe his original response as really being about whether he believes in God or not. (So, the other candidates were declaring themselves atheists?) Pressed on whether he specifically believes in a literal six-day creation that occurred 6,000 years ago or some more metaphorical reading (that might admit evolution as the “means” of creation, say), Huckabee tries to dodge with “I don’t know, I wasn’t there.” Of course, he wasn’t there for any of the events described in the bible. Really, though, are we meant to believe that an ordained Southern Baptist minister just has no view on whether the creation story is literal or metaphorical? Because aside from being significant in itself, the answer implicates one’s whole approach to biblical interpretation.