Posted on 08/09/2009 8:10:48 PM PDT by Gordon Greene
Just in case anyone missed it (and I think most did), there is little difference between the brother of Rahm Emanuel (Ezekial) and none other than Charles Robert Darwin.
I trust at this point most of you have seen the ravings of one of the lunatic healthcare advisors to Obama, the high potentate of all that is to be united. Ezekial Emanuel’s words could just as well have been spoken in the Third Reich and are as follows:
"When implemented, the Complete Lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated... The Complete Lives system justifies preference to younger people because of priority to the worst-off rather than instrumental value."
Justification for killing children under the guise of abortion started with something as humanistic as “only in cases of rape and incest” and landed squarely in the passenger seat of “a woman’s right to choose”. As a society we have been flirting with euthanasia for some odd years now. Well, as incrementalism would have it, it is now beating down our doors and trying to take control of our healthcare system.
Another of Obama’s close compatriots, Cass Sunstein had this to say about his relationship with Obama:
“Not so long ago, the phone rang in my office. It was Barack Obama. For more than a decade, Obama was my colleague at the University of Chicago Law School. He is also a friend. But since his election to the Senate, he does not exactly call every day.”
This is a quote from Mr. Sunstein regarding the topic of healthcare:
"I urge that the government should indeed focus on life-years rather than lives. A program that saves young people produces more welfare than one that saves old people."
As a general rule, those in politics and academia do not speak in a vacuum. It is only through years of programming that these people, including Obama develop a callousness that is unmatched in normal society. The teachings of public education and education in our major universities have centered on the idea that Darwin’s theories are correct even against human and scientific evidence to the contrary. If you want to know where these radical thinkers derived their ideas, you need look no further than the writings of one Charles Robert Darwin.
“With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one up to the last moment. ..”
“Vaccination has preserved thousands who from a weak constitution would formerly have suc-cumbed to smallpox. Thus, the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man....”
“ Excepting in the case of man himself, hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.”
“[Yet,] the aid which we feel impelled to give to the help¬less is mainly an incidental result of the [otherwise good] instinct of sympathy...”
“We must therefore bear the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind...”
Evolution… the survival of the fittest… we wonder why our children emerge from the higher institutions of learning and forsake our God, our morals and our teachings. They do so because the theory that is so pervasive in those institutions belittles our existence and lowers our relevance to that of a simple animal. Is humaneness in a society a trait to be honored? Yes. Are animals meant to be abused, neglected or treated dishonorably? No!
It’s perspective, man!!!
If there is no God and we are truly left to our own moral devices, then we are no more than animals. Our our worth is no greater than the sum of all our parts and any Evolutionist who claims the strength of their morality is being dishonest with themselves and dishonoring the very name of their evolutionary savior, Charles Darwin! Don’t tell me we are no greater than the animals that were placed on this earth to serve mankind and then brag to me that the strength of your convictions is greater than Christianity.
If you love The Origin of the Species, embrace it! Call Australian Aborigines, Blacks and Indians what your father called them… SAVAGES! Rave about the inferior female mind:
“. . . a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can women—whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands. If two lists were made of the most eminent men and women in poetry, painting, sculpture, music (inclusive of both composition and performance), history, science, and philosophy, with half-a-dozen names under each subject, the two lists would not bear comparison. We may also infer, from the law of the deviation from averages, so well illustrated by Mr. Galton, in his work on "Hereditary Genius" that . . . the average of mental power in man must be above that of women (Darwin, 1896:564).”
Be true to your roots as Evolutionists, supporting those like Emanuel and Sunstein who sound more like Darwin and Hitler than Jefferson or Reagan. You keep your faith and vote for healthcare reform: I’ll keep mine and fight Darwinism, Communism, Humanism, Socialism, Marxism and everything they stand for!
Or perhaps you could look into what it is Charles Darwin actually believed. Take note that your beliefs on the origin of the species are more in line with the Communist and Nazi than with the Christian. Don’t just listen to your mealy-mouthed professors who watered down the conclusions of a man possessed of the opinion that you came into this world from ancestors swinging from the trees. READ WHAT DARWIN ACTUALLY SAID. Then use the brain God put in your thick skulls to draw your own conclusions.
P.S. If you actually read Darwin’s writings and believe what the man said then, why do you consider yourself conservative? No, I really want an answer.
Question: Who said this?
"Man must realize that a fundamental law of necessity reigns throughout the whole realm of Nature and that his existence is subject to the law of eternal struggle and strife . . .where the strong are always the masters of the weak and where those subject to such laws must obey them or be destroyed, one general law leading to the advancement of all organic beings . . . let the strongest live and the weakest die."
Answer: Adolph Hitler (Now tell me how that differs from Darwin’s survival of the fittest mentality?)
After all, we have a desire to know what they propose to replace evolutionary science. Does their anti-materialistic movement also include denying that Catholics are Christians?
If you answered that you believed Catholics to be Christians, the 'game' would be over.
“You’re obfuscating, so I’d like to ask a follow up question:”
And you’re trying my patience... the only obfuscation here is in your own mind’s apparent inability to understand a concept more complicated than, “Eat... breathe... walk.”
“Do you believe that the actions that are specified in the passages from Romans that you quoted number among the requirements of the Catholic faith?”
Did you REALLY mean to phrase the question that way? What does it matter what I believe about the requirements of the Catholic faith? My beliefs do not change their specific requirements??? I do not know what the Catholics believe about Romans. You will need to ask them yourself. Do you suppose all those claiming to be Christian are Catholic? Your questions in this vain are becoming quite ignorant if not plain comical.
Like I alluded to earlier, you will only believe an answer is given when it meets your criteria for an answer. I cannot turn on the light bulb in your head I can only apply the voltage. If the filament is burned, you have only the 60’s to blame.
Any of you Catholic folks care to answer Bucks question so he can climb back up in his tree? Anybody?
I find it most interesting that those who object to other's perceived judgment of themselves, as to whether they are Christian or not, have no compunction about turning around and doing the very thing that they condemn in others; that is, judging whether someone else is Christian or not.
Evos get in such a snit about being judged as to their Christianity, and turn right around and judge others.
There's an awful lot of *Do as I say* coming from the evo crowd.
Obama could end the BC issue by producing his BC. metmom and others could end this issue by saying they believe Catholics are Christians.
Always the accusation of projection. No criticism is ever accepted, even long enough to actually address and disprove.
Always the accusation of projection. No criticism is ever accepted, even long enough to actually address and disprove.
Yes.
You might follow up on some more of the thread, CW. I’ve never been afraid to answer a question.
Do my replies look to you like I fear offending someone? If so, you’re not paying attention.
“What does it matter what I believe about the requirements of the Catholic faith?”
Because I’m asking about the Catholic faith!
May I assume that your answer is, “No, I do not believe that Catholics are Christians.”?
I’m just going to wait for him to post his own thread. (if he has the fortitude)
All he is doing now is trying to hijack your thread. (ie, ‘evolving’ his trick questions so he can keep asking them, etc)
And don’t think I missed the “we”. I understand you guys are here as a team to stir it up. Please bring a collective intelligence to the party next time, if you will.
Only twaddle I see is post #2.
Ask the mods to delete it.
“And it scares the pants off you”
What’s this thing with you and people with their pants off... is there something we need to know?
OTOH, I have seen 'Christians' post on FR that it is impossible to sin if one is a "Soldier of God". I guess that is the same mindset that led 'Christians' to burn non-believers at the stake.
Not to a real Christian. - Real Christians accept God's word, which denies evolution over 100 times.
It is a common phrase. But it took you to find the 'evil' in it. I would say that it was your mind that is focused on evil.
“After all, we have a desire to know what they propose to replace evolutionary science. Does their anti-materialistic movement also include denying that Catholics are Christians?”
Is that the best you could think of? Like I said... collective intelligence. If you’re going to feed off of one another you might at least try to bounce these things off of each other or something. That was one lame, sad excuse.
No, you said
If YOU read Darwin you will not find the phrase “survival of the fittest"And that's simply false, as you now realize.
Heres your answer:
“Not to a real Christian. - Real Christians accept God’s word, which denies evolution over 100 times.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.