Posted on 12/01/2008 2:33:55 PM PST by Fichori
“I replied by asking you to show your case that Darwin promoted eugenics.” [excerpt]Strawman.
Your last post and several before that! Do I smell you discomfort on your part?
Here was your question to me. It was me that asked you where Darwin promoted eugenics.
Do you even know why evolutionaries like Darwin, Huxley, Fisher, etc, promoted eugenics?
Are you now agreeing that Darwin did NOT promote eugenics?
You certainly tried to construe my posts to mean that.Where did I say that Darwin himself promoted eugenics?“Your last post and several before that! Do I smell you discomfort on your part?” [262]
“Here was your question to me. It was me that asked you where Darwin promoted eugenics.” [263]So you admit to misconstruing what I said.
“Are you now agreeing that Darwin did NOT promote eugenics?” [264]Interesting thing is, that wasn't the question.
I give up. Do you are do you not believe Darwin promoted eugenics. You asked me to explain why he did which implies that you think he did but when I ask you to source his promotion you link me to a site that says “Coming soon” and then go on to ask me where you said Darwin promoted eugenics. Do you get paid for this nonsense?
Are you now agreeing that Darwin did NOT promote eugenics?” [264]
Simple question. Why no answer?
I take that to mean that you now do not believe that Darwin promoted eugenics. Thank you.
“I give up.” [excerpt]Ok, I'll give you a clue.
"The garden of humanity is very full of weeds, nurture will never transform them into flowers; the eugenist calls upon the rulers of mankind to see that there shall be space in the garden, freed of weeds, for individuals and races of finer growth to develop with the full bloom possible to their species."Evidently Evolutionists are smart enough to know that intelligent beings are better at pulling weeds than Evolution is.- Karl Pearson, Life and Letters of Francis Galton, vol.3.
“Do you are do you not believe Darwin promoted eugenics. You asked me to explain why he did which implies that you think he did but when I ask you to source his promotion you link me to a site that says “Coming soon” and then go on to ask me where you said Darwin promoted eugenics. Do you get paid for this nonsense?” [excerpt]Uh, yer strawman is on fire...
"Eugenic goals are most likely to be attained under a name other than eugenics". "Heredity clinics are the first eugenic proposals that have been adopted in a practical form and accepted by the public... The word eugenics is not associated with them." "The most important eugenic policy at this time is to see that birth control is made equally available to all individuals in every class of society."Considering the Osborn quote and how subsequent Darwin's following in Charles' footsteps embraced Eugenics, what would Charles have called it?- Frederick Osborn, Future of Human Heredity, 1968.
Perhaps if you had read CD's writings you would know and not insinuate about his views.
It seems that Charles did not find eugenics very noble and prefered that the individual be the decider of his mate. In The Descent of Man Darwin noted that aiding the weak to survive and have families could lose the benefits of natural selection, but cautioned that withholding such aid would endanger the instinct of sympathy, "the noblest part of our nature", and factors such as education could be more important. When Galton suggested that publishing research could encourage intermarriage within a "caste" of "those who are naturally gifted", Darwin foresaw practical difficulties, and thought it "the sole feasible, yet I fear utopian, plan of procedure in improving the human race", preferring to simply publicise the importance of inheritance and leave decisions to individuals.[147]
"Before eugenicists and others who are laboring for racial betterment can succeed, they must first clear the way for birth control. Like the advocates for birth control, the eugenicists, for instance, are seeking to assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit." --Margaret SangerOur own little master race!
No thanks, you couldn't read or understand the first time.
Not me. The cultists are oblivious to facts.
Again, how convenient. And hypocritical. And look more projections. Strawmen. blah blah blah.
There never was a first time.
Then why do you ask them?
There never was a first time.
There you go, I rest my case.
All that complaining, and you can't even say exactly what it is you want taught, and how you want the legislation worded to enforce it.
[[“Perhaps you don’t believe that it is eugenically bad for brother to marry sister?”]]
E=Mc2 seems to not know his bible very well- Genetic info was VERY pure at creation, Brothers could indeed marry sisters without ANY genetic problems. Infact, it took a VERY long time for the genetics to degrade to the point where marrying close relatives meant problems- E=Mc2 seems not to realize that God didn’t ‘prevent marrying close relatives’ because it was a ‘sin’- but rather because it got to the point where the genetic code could no longer tolorate such close relations.
I love it when people not familiar with hte bible try to ‘point out sins’ to us.
[[As Ethan Clive Osgoode pointed out Darwin’s cousin invented the word “eugenics”.]]
Whom I heard Darwin was madly in love with lol
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.