The full title of Darwin's most important work?
The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection: The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life
What many fail to comprehend is that 0bamacare is ultimately another version of progressive eugenics.
Yes but the article is factually incorrect into the origination of the pure race and that indeed the current blue-eyed blond haired theme originated in Europe well before any such notion in the U.S. Google for refs, they’re all over the place.
fixed that headline for you
That certainly would be a vast jump of analogical reasoning, from strains of finches to races of people, and not even Charles was willing to embrace all of what we call animal Darwinism today (e.g. he would admit the attribution of such a “perfected” thing as the eye to divine design). It seems that simplified stories are what we recount today, not the messy details.
It should be noted that “Races” in Darwin’s title referred to what we would today more commonly refer to as “subspecies” or “breeds.” It did not specifically refer to human races.
The term is still used in that way in botany and perhaps in other branches of biology.
The connotations we assign to the concept “race” were absent in his day. It had a much broader use. For instance, Kipling, Rhodes and other often referred to “the Anglo-Saxon race.”
Given the general POV of the time, Darwin’s book is surprisingly free of white racism and triumphalism.
Eugenics is no longer horrifying. Again.
I came across this information in the Rockefeller online archives. There were memos, payments, and letters of instructions to Margaret Sanger, the Founder of Planned Parenthood. Out of curiosity, I looked at some of David Rockefellers speeches, and connections, and I have no doubt he is behind Soros and Obama. I collected great info., but don’t have it with me now.
There is also the accusations that Rockefeller owns the pharmaceutical industry through shell companies. Those companies include the mandated vaccines, and many harmful drugs that are approved by the FDA despite admissions of fraudulent misrepresentations and known dangers.
http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/flexner-report-rockefeller-ama-takeover/
See Skinner v. Oklahoma and book ‘In Reckless Hands’, by Victoria Nourse. Scary stuff.
But this can't be correct. Scientists NEVER fake or twist data to fit an agenda.
I don’t know why eugenics must always be called a “pseudoscience” to demonstrate the virtuousness of the writer.
Eugenics might be immoral in practice; the criteria used to promote or discourage reproduction may be bad science or short-sighted, but eugenics is most certainly a science as any animal or plant breeder can tell you, or as most observers of human families can.
Two words: Margaret Sanger.
Read Jonah Goldbergs’s book, Liberal Fascism
Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), is a decision of the United States Supreme Court, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., in which the Court ruled that a state statute permitting compulsory sterilization of the unfit, including the intellectually disabled, “for the protection and health of the state” did not violate the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The decision was largely seen as an endorsement of negative eugenics—the attempt to improve the human race by eliminating “defectives” from the gene pool.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell
"As an agency making for progress, conscious selection must replace the blind forces of natural selection; and men must utilize all the knowledge acquired by studying the process of evolution in the past in order to promote moral and physical progress in the future. The nation which first takes this great work thoroughly in hand will surely not only win in all matters of international competition, but will be given a place of honour in the history of the world." —Leonard Darwin, Presidential address, First International Eugenics Congress, 1912.