Because it's perhaps the most important scientific theory in biological science. Kids in high school aren't taught much in the way of practical science- they're just given a broad spectrum of important scientific concepts and theories. They learn how to apply such theories if they pursue a science degree in college. We learned about a whole bunch of scientific concepts in high school with few, if any, real word applications in our lives.
Are you unaware of Darwinian eugenics?
Feel free to expound. This should be interesting. I'm guessing you're going to blame America's high abortion rate on the TOE.
Darwin Medalist Karl Pearson, Darwinism, Medical Progress, and Eugenics, an address to the West London Medical-Surgical Society, 1912:
Let me, even at the risk of talking about the familiar, sketch for you the broad outlines of Darwin's theory of evolutionary progress. The individual better fitted to its environment lived longer than its fellows, had more offspring, and these, inheriting its better fitness, raised the type of the race. The environment against which the individual had to struggle here was not only formed by the other members of its species, not only by its physical surroundings, but by the germs of disease of all types. According to Darwin -- and some of us still believe him to be right -- the ascent of man, physical and mental, was brought about by this survival of the fitter. Now, if you are going lo take Darwinism as your theory of life and apply it to human problems, you must not only believe it to be true, but you must set to, and demonstrate that it actually applies.Darwin's theory means this, that if individuals are reared under a constant environment, and a larger percentage of them are killed off in the first year of life, then a smaller percentage of those remaining will die in the later years of life, because more of the weaklings have been killed off... Now if there be -- and I, for one, think that two independent lines of inquiry demonstrate that there is -- a fairly stringent selection of the weaker individuals by the mortality of infancy and childhood, what will happen, if by increased medical skill and by increased state support and private charity, we enable the weaklings to survive and to propagate their kind? Why, undoubtedly we shall have a weaker race... Surely here is an antinomy -- a fundamental opposition between medical progress and the science of national eugenics, of race efficiency. Gentlemen, I venture to think it is an antinomy, and will remain one until the nation at large recognises as a fundamental doctrine the principle that everyone, being born, has the right to live, but the right to live does not in itself convey the right to everyone to reproduce their kind... Our social instincts, our common humanity enforce upon us the conception that each person born has the right to live, yet this right essentially connotes a suspension of the full intensity of natural selection. Darwinism and medical progress are opposed forces, and we shall gain nothing by screening that fact, or, in opposition to ample evidence, asserting that Darwinism has no application to civilised man... I say that only a very thorough eugenic policy can possibly save our race from the evils which must flow from the antagonism between natural selection and medical progress.
It’s got a lot to do with the devaluing of human life that makes abortion palatable for so many people.
Christianity holds all life as sacred. It doesn’t allow for killing babies because they’re deformed, or the wrong gender, or they’re inconvenient.
Christianity has the moral restraint on killing that doesn’t exist in other belief systems. In a survival of the fittest mentality, there is no reason to consider killing the defective as wrong because there is no moral base.
That is laughable.
Feel free to expound. This should be interesting. I'm guessing you're going to blame America's high abortion rate on the TOE.
I'm guessing you don't understand that eugenics is a primary component of Darwinism. Or you are just a typical Darwinist who prefers to focus on evolutionary theory rather than address the true agenda of Darwinism, you're probably one of these leftists who think that communism is all about economic theory.