Replies

They advocate teaching things in science class not based on science.

Let's see what the great Darwinian (and Darwin Medalist) J.B.S Haldane advocated:

…Marxism is the application of scientific method to the widest field so far achieved by man. If Marxism were taken for granted, or even if its general principles were widely understood in this country, such emphasis would be unnecessary.
Sixty years ago Karl Marx died in London. Every year since his death he has had a greater influence on world history above all since Lenin put his theories into practice in 1917. … [Marx] can justly be compared with contemporaries like Faraday, Darwin, and Pasteur, who are still influencing our lives and thoughts, because their ideas were important not only for their own time, but for many generations to come. These men applied scientific method to new fields. So did Marx.
Just as Darwin applied scientific method to the problem of man's ancestry, and Pasteur to that of his diseases, Marx applied it to history, politics, and economics.
We celebrate the anniversary of the great teacher who has shown us the way out of our present distresses, who has demonstrated that there are no limits to the application of science.
J.B.S Haldane, Science Advances, 1947

And of course the great Darwinian, Horatio Newman, advocated teaching eugenics in science class, but that's another story.

[Marx] can justly be compared with contemporaries like Faraday, Darwin, and Pasteur, who are still influencing our lives and thoughts, because their ideas were important not only for their own time, but for many generations to come. These men applied scientific method to new fields. So did Marx -- J.B.S Haldane.

Let me get your argument straight. Because Darwin's ideas are still influencing our lives and thoughts, as are Faraday's, Pasters', and Marx's, that is proof that Darwin's theory of evolution, as modified by 150 years of scientific advances by tens of thousands of scientists, is hogwash.

Is that what you were trying to peddle?

I think you nailed it in your post--though you didn't quite state it.

Science, without a Judeo-Christian underpinning forming an ethical foundation, quickly degenerates into studies in eugenics, euthanasia, and the like.

History, without a Judeo-Christian underpinning, quickly degenerated into Nitsche, which led directly, though in bifurcated fashion, to Marxism and German National Socialism.

Nitsche leaned heavily on Darwin, and once God was taken out of the equation of life, there seemed to be no sense to it all, so Freddy Nitsche claimed it was about survival of the fittest (shades of Darwin?) and Hitler killed off the cripples and weak in society (shades of Darwin?). National Socialism was simply applied Darwinism, and by its moral yardstick, killing off the weak is NOT morally wrong--by its standard. But by a Judeo-Christian one, it IS.

Just a thought. Interesting how Darwin --> Nitsche --> Marx --> Hitler! A continuous line of applied thought.

Moral of the story: Keep God in politics, history, national holidays, tradition, or you move into either a Soviet- or Hitlerian-godless society, with all the consequences.

...and no one wants to live like that. Look where it led.

Judge an ideology by its own fruits.

SAURON