Basically, you can't sit there telling the whole world that the only moral law in nature is "the survival of the fittest" and then try to claim you con't know anything about the obvious political consequences an idea like that is going to have; that's idiotic.
Still haven't grasped the illogic, I see. Let's play by your rules: Any religious belief that gives us a Torquemada and Jim Jones is basically evil and shouldn't be allowed to exist. Sound ridiculous? Of course it does. It's how you sound when you post about evolution.
Basically, you can't sit there telling the whole world that the only moral law in nature is "the survival of the fittest" and then try to claim you con't know anything about the obvious political consequences an idea like that is going to have; that's idiotic.
No one except the more lunatic fringes of the creationist movement ever says that survival of the fittest is some sort of moral law. Please learn the difference between an observation based on evidence ("You have an ear infection") and a prescription ("Try penicillin"). What's idiotic is someone trying to convert a scientific observation about the origin of species into a system for running a country.
Got it now?