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 Emanuels 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 womans 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 Obamas 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 Darwins 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!
Its 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! Dont 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 womenwhether 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: Ill 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. Dont 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 Darwins 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 Darwins survival of the fittest mentality?)
Good grief. What a bunch of twaddle.
Argue with the quotes then... ignore the twaddle.
I’ll do you one better... actually read it. No way you had time to before posting your comment.
And yes, I am.
Please include yourselves in the debate if you wish... and invite friends. I want to know what they really think about Darwin.
Hellish pretty much sums it up. Lock and load people.
Pure tripe.
Got the Nazi = evolutionist point right in the title this time. Didn’t even wait for the minions to do it.
Evolution is perfectly compatible with Christianity.
Soylent Green . . . the shape of things to come
Show me the difference. Call it tripe but there are many more quotes I could post. And besides... why would I wait for the minions when Darwin’s own words draw perfect parallels?
You’re the evolutionist... care to show me where Darwin’s theory and his writings are consistent with Christianity?
You might make me a believer yet.
You are mistaking the sociopolitical strategy of eugenics with the scientific theory of evolution.
Eugenics is the desire to kill your enemies under the defense of improving the culture.
Evolution is the scientific theory that those creatures who die before reproducing cannot pass on their genes, and therefore only those who survive the destructive pressures of their environment do, in fact, pass on their genes, and as a result, the only genes left have been "naturally selected" for survival.
In other words, evolutionary theory is merely the observation of a fact so simple it cannot be discarded - even by anti-evolutionists, because dead things don't reproduce, while genetic change occurs with every birth.
The extent of the influence of the evolutionary process, on the other hand, can be easily argued, because science itself cannot show such the evolution mechanism as adequate to explain many of the developments that are pointed to by anti-evolutionists.
Eugenics merely uses evolutionary concepts piecemeal to serve a collectivist agenda that seeks the authority to exterminate those who would challenge the ruling elite. In this, the link between eugenics and evolution is fraudulent, because eugenics is not scientific - any eugenics selection process is completely biased by the motives of the power group which desires it's use as justification for mass murder.
The difference between what you are doing and pimping your blog? Nothing.
Why I said it's twaddle. The Nazi party enbraced mysticism,reincarnation, and the paranormal. TToE and science is exactly the opposite.
Well said.
I took the time to read it - it’s twaddle all right
Honestly? I’m flattered you would notice I have one. Actually? I wanted to post it only here but have gotten tagged before for not having a source.
Jealous.
Jealous? Not hardly - just fed up with egomaniacs trying to drive traffic to their crappy sites.
The religion that most Darwinists embrace wholeheartedly and without question is in fact about as much mysticism as any.
TToE is a religion of pure faith.
Incorrect assumptions... if you read Darwin you find that the survival of the fittest is not a passive thing, but an aggressive act. Though he did not support the killing of weaker beings, he clearly believed that the act of doing so was part of evolution itself. He also pointed out in great detail the inferior and superior qualities of humans based on race, sex, health, handicap and physical abnormalities.
And along with this, he made it clear the proper way of nature was to eliminate the inferior to promote the strong.
If you wish to qualify his statements as something more or less you have to employ spin, selective memory or revise history.
No faith needed. Just pick up any basic biology book and read it without your preconceived notions.
FYI; I taught at a university and not once did I feel the need to let “faith” enter into the mix during any of my lectures. Yes we solved for unknowns (and some have no solutions as of yet), but we used math (many a differential equation crossed my path not to mention Riemann curvature tensors), logic, and the scientific method.
Again, I’m flattered that someone with such an outstanding ego would consider mine something to be admired.
I just hope to God that my ego is stronger than yours so it has a chance for survival in the battle of egos.
My battle cry from this point forward... Leggo my ego!
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.