I answered this exact same question back in post 1997.
I first addressed your "Darwin-Marx" issue in post 1973, then added more in 2013, in 2020, in 2022, in 2031, and attempted a summary in 2145.
I have been patient and polite. I have responded with diligence and I have given citations for all the assertions I have made. I have now experienced sufficient dialog with you to understand that you are utterly impervious to facts and logic. You are now on "virtual ignore" -- a status you richly deserve. Good luck, good bye, and God bless you.
No. What you've done is make a mountain out of a mole hill question. What you've NOT done is answer the question forthrightly. An honest answer would not require anyone to abandon the validity of evolution theory, so why be afraid to face any connection between the two? Is this kind of obfuscation characteristic of those who represent your views?
I answered this exact same question back in post 1997. ...
Actually your answers were just plain lies as I showed in Post#2068 and numerous times by chester, most clearly in Post #2040 where he gives the text of the correspondence between Darwin and Marx. That Marx thought that Darwin's work was immensely helpful to his theory is beyond doubt from the following:
When Marx read the Origin, he entusiastically declared ti to be "a basis in natural science for the class struggle in istory". ... If Darwin had not the least idea of what Marx was up to or what they might have in common, Marx knew precisely what he vauled in Darwin, Recommending the Origin to Lassalle, he explained that "despite all deficiencies not only is the death-blow dealt here for the first time to teleology in the natural sciences, but their rational meaning is empirically examined." The other reason for his interest in the Origin emerged in Das Kapital, where he complained of the abstract materialism of most natural science, "a materialism that excludes history and its process." It was his hope that by focusing attention on change and development, the Origin would destroy both the old-fashioned supernaturalism and the equally old-fashioned materialism.
From: Gertrude Himmelfarb, "Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution", Page 421.
Another example of your "open mindedness"? We can certainly add it to your new refrain each time you call the troops to a thread "[This ping list for the evolution -- not creationism -- side of evolution threads,"
Now you can put whoever you like on 'virtual ignore', although it is a very childish thing to do. However, when you use this virtual ignore to ignore refutations made about your statements which have been made directly to you, you are being dishonest - as you showed numeroust times in the discussion with chester before he was on virtual ignore. It seems pretty clear that your problem is two-fold:
1. you do not like to have your opinions challenged by others so you just ignore anything that does not agree with your views.
2. you do not have a response to those who disagree with you and use the 'virtual ignore' as an excuse for dishonestly dismissing refutations showing your views to be false.
It seems therefore that you are totally unable to function in a normal environment and must close yourself to all but those who parrot your exact same views. These are the signs of an ideologue and a deeply disturbed person whose egotism and arrogance have forced him to separate himself from normal concourse with fellow human beings.