Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

America's Taliban strikes again
Arkansas News Bureau ^ | 28 August 2006 | John Brummett

Posted on 08/28/2006 6:31:13 AM PDT by PatrickHenry

The Holocaust wasn't Hitler's fault. Darwin made him do it. Complicit as well are any who buy into the scientific theory that modern man evolved from lower animal forms.

That's the latest lunacy from one of our more fanatical right-wing American Christian television outfits, the Coral Ridge Ministries in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

Coral Ridge espouses that America is not a free-religion nation, but a Christian one. It argues there should be no separation of church and state.

Thus it's America's Taliban, America's Shiite theocracy.

It certainly has a propensity for explaining or excusing Hitler. A few years ago it brought in a conference speaker to argue that American abortion was a more horrible atrocity than the Holocaust.

One year it disinvited Cal Thomas as a conference speaker after Brother Cal got too liberal. You're thinking I must be kidding. But I kid you not. Brother Cal had displayed the utter audacity to co-author a book contending that American Christian conservatives ought to worry a little more about spreading the gospel from the bottom of the culture up rather than from the top of politics down.

Now this: Coral Ridge is airing a couple of cable installments of a "documentary," called "Darwin's Deadly Legacy," that seek to make a case that, without Darwin, there could have been no Hitler.

Authoritative sources for the program include no less than columnist Ann Coulter, noted scientist, who says she is outraged that she didn't get instructed in Darwin's effective creation of Hitler when she was in school. She says she has since come to understand that Hitler was merely a Darwinist trying, by extermination of a group of people he considered inferior because of their religion and heritage, to "hurry along" the natural survival of the Aryan fittest.

Also quoted is Dr. Francis Collins, director of the National Human Genome Project, who tells the Anti-Defamation League that his comments were used out of context and that he is "absolutely appalled" by the "utterly misguided and inflammatory" premise of Coral Ridge's report.

The documentary's theme is really quite simple: Darwin propounded the theory of evolution. Hitler came along and believed the theory. Hitler killed Jews. So, blame Darwin for the Holocaust. Blame, too, all others who agree with or advance Darwin's theory. Get back to God and Adam and Eve and all will be right again with the world.

"To put it simply, no Darwin, no Hitler," said Dr. D. James Kennedy, president of Coral Ridge Ministries. "The legacy of Charles Darwin is millions of deaths."

Obviously, the theme is breath-taking nonsense. You can't equate academic theory with murderous practice. You can't equate a thinker and a madman, or science and crime.

And you can't ever blame one man for another's actions. That once was a proud conservative precept. In a different context, you'll no doubt find Coral Ridge fervently preaching personal responsibility. Except, apparently, for Adolf Hitler, to whom these religious kooks issue a pass. Ol' Adolf, it seems, just fell in with a bad crowd.

By Coral Ridge's premise, Mohammed is to blame for Osama bin Laden. Actually, Coral Ridge might not argue with that. So how about this: The pope is to blame for the IRA. And Jesus is to blame for Mel Gibson, not to mention Coral Ridge Ministries.

[Omitted some author detail and contact info.]


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: abortion; blitheringimbecility; brummetslaw; christianhater; christophobia; coralridge; craniometrics; crevolist; djameskennedy; endautism; endgeneticdefects; endpoverty; eugenics; evolutionism; favouredraces; genefairy; genesis1; genius; hereditary; hereditarygenius; idiocy; ignorantdrivel; jerklist; keywordwars; mntslfabusethread; moronicarticle; naziscience; pantiestootight; racism; racistdarwin; sterilization; sterilizedeficient; sterilizethepoor; stupidistthreadever; theocracy; theophobia; thewordistruth; wodlist; worstsarticleever
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 701-713 next last
To: PatrickHenry
Thus it's America's Taliban, America's Shiite theocracy.

At least the author is fair-minded and even-handed, unlike the Taliban theocracy of Coral Ridge Ministries.

321 posted on 08/28/2006 12:12:33 PM PDT by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: highball
That creationists get so testy about being asked for facts tells us much about the courage of their convictions.

Well, you can always hope that someone does what the greatest killers of all time have done when faced with a similar problem: round the uneducated and unworthy nonbelievers in the cult of Darwinism and liquidate them to improve the species.

322 posted on 08/28/2006 12:15:32 PM PDT by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
This still does not demonstrate that the word "races" in the title of Darwin's first book means what EternalVigilance has implied that it means.

So, just so I understand...you are asserting that Darwin's title, "Origin of the Species" excluded homo sapiens as being a "species"?

323 posted on 08/28/2006 12:19:40 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 313 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry
Here's your "quote," probably taken from an unreliable creationist website:
At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.
Now here's the original, with your snippet in blue:
The great break in the organic chain between man and his nearest allies, which cannot be bridged over by any extinct or living species, has often been advanced as a grave objection to the belief that man is descended from some lower form; but this objection will not appear of much weight to those who, from general reasons, believe in the general principle of evolution. Breaks often occur in all parts of the series, some being wide, sharp and defined, others less so in various degrees; as between the orang and its nearest allies — between the Tarsius and the other Lemuridæ — between the elephant, and in a more striking manner between the Ornithorhynchus or Echidna, and all other mammals. But these breaks depend merely on the number of related forms which have become extinct. At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.
Source (which can be verified): Descent of Man, chapter 6.

In classic creationist fashion, the quote is lifted out of context to make it appear that Darwin says something he does not say. He's talking about breaks in the fossil record. He's explaining why they appear, and that they may appear from similar causes in the future. (It's an observed fact that apes are approaching extinction, as are various primitive tribes. This isn't news. Darwin saw it happening. It's still happening.) Darwin is not advocating genocide or anything else. He's attempting to explain the fossil record.

324 posted on 08/28/2006 12:21:36 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (The universe is made for life, therefore ID. Life can't arise naturally, therefore ID.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 318 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

Wow. No racist conotations there, huh?

/sarcasm

I've noticed that "the Descent of Man" doesn't seem to be in their canon. None of them are defending what it plainly says.


325 posted on 08/28/2006 12:22:34 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 318 | View Replies]

To: RustMartialis
More helpfully, we can see from this timeline that Darwin and others were talking and publishing on the topic of evolution long before "Origin of the Species" was published. The idea was out there, and being discussed.

I cannot find a definitive reference linking something like Mississippi's invocation of an "imperious law of nature" to a specific publication. I can only note that the timeline supports the possibility.

More to the point, however, it is definitely true that others have used evolution to justify their own racist claims.

326 posted on 08/28/2006 12:23:03 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 308 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
So, just so I understand...you are asserting that Darwin's title, "Origin of the Species" excluded homo sapiens as being a "species"?

Since the book On the Origin of Species itself does not address homo sapiens as a species, the title doesn't, either. What is so difficult to understand about that?

327 posted on 08/28/2006 12:23:22 PM PDT by BeHoldAPaleHorse ( ~()):~)>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 323 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
He's attempting to explain the fossil record.

Something evolutionists have never been very good at...

328 posted on 08/28/2006 12:25:12 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 324 | View Replies]

The Genocide Machine

329 posted on 08/28/2006 12:26:50 PM PDT by ml1954 (ID = Case closed....no further inquiry allowed...now move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 316 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry
It does, however, make the claim that there is no reference to human beings in "Origin" specious, though.

Your attempt at an argument is not a valid substitute for using the original book itself to support the original claim.
330 posted on 08/28/2006 12:27:26 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
I've noticed that "the Descent of Man" doesn't seem to be in their canon. None of them are defending what it plainly says.

You were just 58 seconds too late. So close.

331 posted on 08/28/2006 12:27:36 PM PDT by WildHorseCrash
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 325 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
I've noticed that "the Descent of Man" doesn't seem to be in their canon.

Incorrect. I have repeatedly pointed out the opposition to human-based eugenics that Darwin stated in Descent.
332 posted on 08/28/2006 12:29:40 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 325 | View Replies]

To: ml1954

Sylvester McCoy ftw.


333 posted on 08/28/2006 12:31:22 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
So, just so I understand...you are asserting that Darwin's title, "Origin of the Species"

If you actually perused the title page of the book you posted, you might have gotten the title right (Although it's been a while, so you may have forgotten it)

334 posted on 08/28/2006 12:32:09 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (Make peace with your Ann whatever you conceive Her to be -- Hairy Thunderer or Cosmic Muffin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 323 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles
"That creationists get so testy about being asked for facts tells us much about the courage of their convictions."

Well, you can always hope that someone does what the greatest killers of all time have done when faced with a similar problem: round the uneducated and unworthy nonbelievers in the cult of Darwinism and liquidate them to improve the species.

A perfect example.

I ask for facts, and get a smear job built on logical fallacies of guilt by association.

Such childish tactics are beneath the forum, and beneath you.

It does go to show that many Creationists do not have the courage of their convictions, to respond thus when asked to substantiate their claims. Only knowingly false claims require this kind of pathetic defense.

335 posted on 08/28/2006 12:32:56 PM PDT by highball (Proud to announce the birth of little Highball, Junior - Feb. 7, 2006!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 322 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; RegulatorCountry
In classic creationist fashion, the quote is lifted out of context to make it appear that Darwin says something he does not say.

Hey, go easy on the creationists. If they didn't quote mine, they'd have no quotes to post at all.    ;)

336 posted on 08/28/2006 12:35:03 PM PDT by highball (Proud to announce the birth of little Highball, Junior - Feb. 7, 2006!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 324 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
This isn't news. Darwin saw it happening. It's still happening.

But everybody knows that scientific discoveries are mandates to commit carnage. Just as gun ownership is a mandate to murder everyone in sight. Every conservative knows this.

337 posted on 08/28/2006 12:35:51 PM PDT by js1138 (Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 324 | View Replies]

To: Wallace T.

You just BINGO'd it and will catch pro-evolution-secularist-countryclub-RINO h&ll for it.


338 posted on 08/28/2006 12:36:24 PM PDT by attiladhun2 (Islam is a despotism so vile that it would warm the heart of Orwell's Big Brother)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: highball

Such childish tactics are beneath ...you.

Actually, they are routine, standard operating procedure, normal mode of operation, etc.

339 posted on 08/28/2006 12:38:00 PM PDT by ml1954 (ID = Case closed....no further inquiry allowed...now move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 335 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

"The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla."

What, pray tell, is the proper "context" for this statement that is NOT racist, regarding the fossil record or anything else? Darwin quite clearly holds the Caucasian as man in the most civilized contemporary state, with negros and Australians being closer to a gorilla. He envisions a not-so-distant future, with a state of man even higher than Caucasian, with negros, Australians and gorillas having been exterminated.


340 posted on 08/28/2006 12:38:53 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 324 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 701-713 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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