Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The lies of Lynchburg: How U.S. evolutionists taught the Nazis.
Answers In Genesis ^ | September 1997 | Carl Wieland

Posted on 12/01/2008 2:33:55 PM PST by Fichori

First published:
Creation 19(4):22–23
September 1997

by Carl Wieland

The chilling revelations of a recent television documentary1 expose the disturbing consequences of evolutionary ways of thinking. Beginning in the 1920s, many thousands of people in the United States were sterilised against their will and without their consent, to prevent ‘undesirable breeding’. Over 8,000 of these procedures took place at a major centre to which such ‘undesirables’ were sent, in Lynchburg, Virginia.

(Excerpt) Read more at answersingenesis.org ...


TOPICS: History; Science
KEYWORDS: crevo; crevolist; eugenics; evolution; hitler; lynchburg; nazi; virginia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 321-338 next last
To: E=MC2
“I replied by asking you to show your case that Darwin promoted eugenics.” [excerpt]
Strawman.

Where did I say that Darwin himself promoted eugenics?

The question is not if and who promoted eugenics.

The question is why.

A question that you have yet to answer.
261 posted on 12/03/2008 2:53:56 PM PST by Fichori (I believe in a Woman's right to choose, even if she hasn't been born yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
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 posted on 12/03/2008 2:59:14 PM PST by E=MC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
Where did I say that Darwin himself promoted eugenics?

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?

263 posted on 12/03/2008 3:01:26 PM PST by E=MC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
Where did I say that Darwin himself promoted eugenics?

Are you now agreeing that Darwin did NOT promote eugenics?

264 posted on 12/03/2008 3:02:20 PM PST by E=MC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: E=MC2
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]
You certainly tried to construe my posts to mean that.

You still have not answered my original question.
“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.

The question was why did evolutionists promote eugenics.

Which by the way, you still have not answered.

265 posted on 12/03/2008 3:12:55 PM PST by Fichori (I believe in a Woman's right to choose, even if she hasn't been born yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: Fichori

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?


266 posted on 12/03/2008 3:22:00 PM PST by E=MC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 265 | View Replies]

To: Fichori

Are you now agreeing that Darwin did NOT promote eugenics?” [264]

Simple question. Why no answer?


267 posted on 12/03/2008 3:23:18 PM PST by E=MC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 265 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
Where did I say that Darwin himself promoted eugenics? You certainly tried to construe my posts to mean that.

I take that to mean that you now do not believe that Darwin promoted eugenics. Thank you.

268 posted on 12/03/2008 3:24:45 PM PST by E=MC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 265 | View Replies]

To: E=MC2
“I give up.” [excerpt]
Ok, I'll give you a clue.

Karl Pearson, in his own words:
"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."

- Karl Pearson, Life and Letters of Francis Galton, vol.3.

Evidently Evolutionists are smart enough to know that intelligent beings are better at pulling weeds than Evolution is.


“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...

But just for fun, yes, Darwin did promote eugenics.

Leonard Darwin
Florence Henrietta Darwin
Francis Darwin
Horace Darwin
Ruth Frances Darwin
George Howard Darwin
Maud de Puy Darwin
Charles Galton Darwin

Hehe...

According to Fredrick Osborn:
"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."

- Frederick Osborn, Future of Human Heredity, 1968.

Considering the Osborn quote and how subsequent Darwin's following in Charles' footsteps embraced Eugenics, what would Charles have called it?

Oh, yeah, don't go gettin yer knickers in a knot, I was writtin!
269 posted on 12/03/2008 4:01:15 PM PST by Fichori (I believe in a Woman's right to choose, even if she hasn't been born yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
what would Charles have called it?

Perhaps if you had read CD's writings you would know and not insinuate about his views.

270 posted on 12/03/2008 4:07:09 PM PST by E=MC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
Eugenics, what would Charles have called it?

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]

271 posted on 12/03/2008 4:12:20 PM PST by E=MC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies]

To: E=MC2
Charles Darwin was only one person.

There have been dozens of Evolutionists who promoted Eugenics in the name of Evolution, some even bearing the last name of Darwin.


Remember Hitlers Master Race?

"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 Sanger
Our own little master race!

Francis Galton, Karl Pearson, R. A. Fisher, Harry H. Laughlin, Margaret Sanger, as well as that list of Darwin's I posted earlier...

All Eugenists.

And we all know that Evolution makes Eugenics morally permissible.
272 posted on 12/03/2008 4:38:31 PM PST by Fichori (I believe in a Woman's right to choose, even if she hasn't been born yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 271 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
Where and when?

No thanks, you couldn't read or understand the first time.

273 posted on 12/03/2008 4:39:47 PM PST by tpanther (All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
It amazes me how the Evolutionists here on FR will wholeheartedly defend Evolution on a thread that is about the relationship between Evolution and Eugenics.

Not me. The cultists are oblivious to facts.

274 posted on 12/03/2008 4:39:51 PM PST by tpanther (All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies]

To: E=MC2
One negative does not make another positive. Are you still beating your wife?

Again, how convenient. And hypocritical. And look more projections. Strawmen. blah blah blah.

275 posted on 12/03/2008 4:40:58 PM PST by tpanther (All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: tpanther
No thanks, you couldn't read or understand the first time.

There never was a first time.

276 posted on 12/03/2008 6:55:05 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies]

To: E=MC2
I can not reply to a question that may be without merit.

Then why do you ask them?

277 posted on 12/03/2008 7:20:38 PM PST by tpanther (All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
No thanks, you couldn't read or understand the first time.

There never was a first time.

There you go, I rest my case.

278 posted on 12/03/2008 7:24:13 PM PST by tpanther (All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: tpanther
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.

279 posted on 12/03/2008 7:28:03 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 278 | View Replies]

To: Fichori

[[“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


280 posted on 12/03/2008 8:43:10 PM PST by CottShop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 321-338 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson