Can America Survive Evolutionary Humanism?

In addition to original Darwinism, today there are two other versions of evolutionary theory: punctuated equilibrium and neo-Darwinism, a revamped version of the original Darwinism. No matter the variant though, evolution serves as the creation myth for the theological and philosophical worldview of Evolutionary Humanism (Naturalism).

“Evolution is a religion,” declared evolutionary Humanist Michael Ruse. “This was true of evolution in the beginning and it is true still today…One of the most popular books of the era was ‘Religion Without Revelation,’ by Julian Huxley, grandson of Thomas Huxley…As always evolution was doing everything expected of religion and more.” (National Post, Canadian Edition, 5/13/2000)

“Humanism is a philosophical, religious, and moral point of view.” (Humanist Manifestos I & II, 1980, Introduction, Paul Kurtz)

The primary denominations of Evolutionary Humanism are Cultural Marxism/Communism, Secular Humanism, Postmodernism, and Spiritual Communism. The offshoots of these are among others, New Age/green environmentalism/Gaia, socialism, progressivism, liberalism, multiculturalism, and atheism. Individually and collectively, these are modernized versions of pre-Biblical naturalism (paganism).

All worldviews begin with a religious declaration. The Biblical worldview begins with, “In the beginning God…” Cosmic Humanism begins, “In the beginning Divine Matter.” Communism, Postmodernism, and Secular Humanism begin with, “In the beginning Matter.” Matter is all there is, and it not only thinks, but is Divine:

“…matter itself continually attains to higher perfection under its own power, thanks to indwelling dialectic…the dialectical materialists attribution of ‘dialectic’ to matter confers on it, not mental attributes only, but even divine ones.” (Dialectical Materialism, Gustav A. Wetter, 1977, p. 58)

In explicitly religious language, the following religionists offer all praise, honor, and glory to their Creator:

“We may regard the material and cosmic world as the supreme being, as the cause of all causes, as the creator of heaven and earth.” (Vladimir Lenin quoted in Communism versus Creation, Francis Nigel Lee, 1969, p. 28)

“The Cosmos is all that is or ever will be.” (Carl Sagan, Cosmos, 1980, p. 4)

Evolutionary Humanism has demonstrated itself to be an extremely dangerous worldview. In just the first eighty-seven years of the twentieth century, the evolutionist project of radically transforming the world and mankind through the power of evolutionism has led to the extermination of between 100-170 million ‘subhuman’ men, women, and children.

First, in order that materialist ethics be consistent with the idea that life evolved by chance and continues to evolve over time, ethics must be built on human social instincts that are in a continuous process of change over evolutionary time. This view demolishes both moral ethics and social taboos, thereby liberating man to do as he pleases. Over time this results in a lawless climate haunted by bullies, predators, despots, psychopaths, and other unsavory elements.

Perhaps Darwin could not envision the evil unleashed by his ideas. Nonetheless, he did have some inkling, for he wrote in his “Autobiography” that one who rejects God,

“…can have for his rule of life…those impulses and instincts which are strongest or…seem to him the best ones.” (Fatal Fruit, Tom DeRosa, p.7)

Humanist Max Hocutt realizes that materialist ethics are hugely problematical, but offers no solution. An absolute moral code cannot exist without God, however God does not exist, says Hocutt. Therefore,

“…if there were a morality written up in the sky somewhere but no God to enforce it, I see no reason why we should obey it. Human beings may, and do, make up their own rules.” (Understanding the Times, David Noebel, p. 138-139)

Jeffrey Dahmer, a psychopath who cannibalized his victims, acted on Darwin’s advice. In an interview he said,

“If a person doesn’t think there is a God to be accountable to, then…what is the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges? That’s how I thought…I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all just came from the slime.” (Dahmer in an interview with Stone Phillips, Dateline NBC, 11/29/1994)

With clearly religious overtones, atheist philosopher Bertrand Russell summarizes the amoral materialist ethic:

“Blind to good and evil, reckless of destruction, omnipotent matter rolls on its relentless way.” (Russell, “Why I am not a Christian and Other Essays on Religion and Related Subjects,” 1957, p. 115)

Next, materialist epistemology and metaphysics dispossesses man of soul, free will, conscience, mind, and reason, thereby dehumanizing (animalizing) man and totally destroying not only the worth, dignity, and meaning of human life, but the possibility of freedom. The essence of this annihilation is captured in the following quotes:

Man is “but fish made over…” declared biologist William Etkin (Pushing the Antithesis, Greg L. Bahnsen, p. 224). And his life is but a “partial, continuous, progressive, multiform and continually interactive, self-realization of the potentialities of atomic electron states,” explained J.D. Bernal (1901-1971), past Professor of Physics at the University of London (The Origin of Life, Bernal, 1967, xv). Furthermore, “The universe cares nothing for us,” trumpets William Provine, Cornell University Professor of Biology, “and we have no ultimate meaning in life.” (Scientists, Face It! Science and Religion are Incompatible,” The Scientist, Sept. 1988)

Man... “must be degraded from a spiritual being to an animalistic pattern. He must think of himself as an animal, capable of only animalistic reactions. He must no longer think of himself…as capable of ‘spiritual endurance,’ or nobility.” By animalizing man his “state of mind…can be ordered and enslaved.” (Russian Textbook on Psychopolitics, “Degradation and Shock,” Chapter viii)

Finally, Evolutionary Humanism posits the notion that despite the fact that man is “but fish made over…” there are in fact, some exceptions to this rule. For it happens---by chance of course---that some lucky ‘species’ and ‘races’ of the human animal are more highly evolved (superior) and therefore enlightened than the others, who are---unluckily for them---less evolved and as a consequence, subhuman. Paired to this view is the idea that if a species or race does not continue to evolve (progress up the evolutionary ladder), it will become extinct. Together, these ideas lead logically to the deadly conclusion that in order to preserve the fittest of the species---or the spiritually evolved, as is the case with Spiritual Communism--- it is morally incumbent upon the superior to replace (via the science of eugenics and population control) and/or liquidate the subhumans. In his book, “The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex,” (1871) Charles Darwin foresaw this eventuality:

“At some future period…the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world…the anthropomorphous apes…will no doubt be exterminated.” (Descent, 2nd ed., p. 183)

In practice, the materialist worldview is a hellish recipe for catastrophe, as was amply demonstrated by the 20th century’s two most blood-soaked political movements--- pagan Nazism and atheist Communism. Both rejected God, and both were animated by Darwinism

Hitler’s murderous philosophy was built on Darwinian evolution and preservation of favored species. In his book, “Evolution and Ethics, British evolutionist Sir Arthur Keith notes,

“The leader of Germany is an evolutionist not only in theory, but, as millions know to their cost, in the rigor of its practice.” (1947, p.230)

It was Darwinism that inspired Hitler to try to create---by way of eugenics--- a superior race, the Aryan Man. In pursuit of his ambition, Hitler eliminated what he considered were inferior human animals, among which were for example, Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, and Christians.

Evolutionism in Nazi Germany resulted in gas chambers, ovens, and the liquidation of eleven million “useless eaters” and other undesirables. Evolutionist Niles Eldridge, author of “Darwin: Discovering the Tree of Life,” reluctantly concurs. Darwin’s theory, he acknowledges,

“has given us the eugenics movement and some of its darker outgrowths, such as the genocidal practices of the Nazis.” (2005, p. 13)

Even though Karl Marx wrote his Communist Manifesto before Darwin published his “On the Species,” the roots of Communism are nonetheless found in Darwinism. Karl Marx wrote Fredrich Engels that Darwin’s ‘Origin’,

“is the book which contains the basis in natural science for our view.” (Marxian Biology and the Social Scene, Conway Zirkle, 1959)

Stephane Courtois, one of the authors of The Black Book of Communism, relates that,

“In Communism there exists a sociopolitical eugenics, a form of Social Darwinism.” (p. 752)

“Darwin put an end to the belief that the animal and vegetable species bear no relation to one another (and) that they were created by God, and hence immutable.” (Fatal Fruit, Tom DeRosa, p. 9)

Lenin exercised godlike power over life and death. He saw himself as, “the master of the knowledge of the evolution of social species.” It was Lenin who “decided who should disappear by virtue of having been condemned to the dustbin of history.” From the moment Lenin made the “scientific” decision that the bourgeoisie represented a stage of humanity that evolution had surpassed, “its liquidation as a class and the liquidation of the individuals who actually or supposedly belonged to it could be justified.” (The Black Book of Communism, p. 752)

Alain Brossat draws the following conclusions about the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, and the ties that bind them:

“The ‘liquidation’ of the Muscovite executioners, a close relative of the ‘treatment’ carried out by Nazi assassins, is a linguistic microcosm of an irreparable mental and cultural catastrophe that was in full view on the Soviet Stage. The value of human life collapsed, and thinking in categories replaced ethical thought…In the discourse and practice of the Nazi exterminators, the animalization of Other…was closely linked to the ideology of race. It was conceived in the implacably hierarchical racial terms of “subhumans” and “supermen”…but in Moscow in 1937, what mattered…was the total animalization of the Other, so that a policy under which absolutely anything was possible could come into practice.” (ibid, p. 751)

Ronald Reagan loved God and America. America he said is, “the moral force that defeated communism and all those who would put the human soul into bondage.” (Republican National Convention, Houston TX, 8/17/1992)

Even though he was optimistic about America’s future he nevertheless cautioned that America must maintain her reliance on God and her commitment to righteousness and morality. He liked quoting Alexis de Tocqueville’s insightful analysis of the source of America’s greatness:

“Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret and genius of her power. America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.” (In the Words of Ronald Reagan, by Michael Reagan)

As America moves into the 21st century, we have yet to admit a shameful, dark secret. Evolutionism…the creation myth, that empowered Nazism and Communism, is being taught to America’s youth in our government-controlled schools. The animalization of Americans is well advanced and coupled to a corresponding slow collapse of human worth. Already we hear of human life spoken of in dehumanizing categories such as ‘vegetable,’ “non-persons,” and ‘uterine content.’

Ominously, Evolutionary Humanism has also outstripped Judeo-Christian precepts in our universities, judiciary, federal bureaucracy, corporations, medicine, law, psychology, sociology, entertainment, news media and halls of Congress. As Biocentrism it fuels the nonhuman animal rights project, the gay rights movement, radical feminism, and the increasingly powerful and influential green environmentalist program, which demands that America submit to the draconian mandates of the Kyoto Treaty.

America, the “moral force that defeated communism” is on the verge of completely rejecting God, the natural order, and moral absolutes and instead, embracing the godless religion of evolution, amorality, and the unnatural.

Evolutionary Humanism is the most dangerous delusion thus far in history. It begins with the ‘animalization of Other,’ in tandem with the elevation of the ‘superior,’ for whom this serves as a license to make up their own rules, abuse power, and force their will onto the citizens. This is accompanied by a downward spiraling process that pathologizes the natural order, moral ethics, virtue, and social taboos while simultaneously elevating narcissism, tyranny, cruelty, nihilism, confusion, perversion, sadism, theft, and lying to positions of politically correct “new morality,” which is then enforced through sensitivity training, speech codes, hate crime laws, and other intimidation tactics. If not stopped, as history warns us, this rapidly escalating downward process leads inevitably to totalitarianism, enslavement, and eventually mass murder.

“A scientific analysis of behavior dispossesses autonomous man and turns the control he has been said to exert over to the environment. The individual…is henceforth to be controlled…in large part by other men.” (Understanding the Times, David Noebel, p. 232)

Linda is the author of many published essays on culture, worldview, and politics. Her essays are published both nationally and internationally. She is a member of MoveOff.org

[.. That's odd. I was told on this same thread that evolution doesn't address the spiritual (metaphysical) aspects of man at all (and that in doing so denies that they exist at all). ..]

You miss the ironic humor of the comment... Oh! well..

Actually man does evolve when he is born again into another "creature".. You know, evolving from a primate to a spirit..

Why on earth do you suppose the Islamofascists are "creationists?" Where is your evidence for this?

I don't have personal knowledge of the beliefs of any particular Islamofacists, but I assume they would mirror the teachings of Islamic scholars. There are dozens of Islamic websites devoted to creationism. I am not aware of a single Islamic teacher who argues for evolution or for the legitimacy of science as a way of acquiring knowledge. If you are interested in the subject you could start here.

The statement -- "Islamofascists are 'creationists'" -- is completely nonsensical to me.

!?!

Wikipedia: Islamic creationism

Check out some of the links to Islamic creationism/antievolution sites. Much of the material is virtually identical to the output of American creationist orgs like the ICR. Islamic and Christian antievolution orgs have cooperated in conferences and the like.

The wiki article notes some differences in emphasis and flavor, and that Islam has liberals who accept evolution just like Christianity does, but to say you can't even imagine fundamentalist Muslims being creationists...

You're really not putting us on?

Really?

You don't have to know the specific content of their belief; one has only to look at what they do. That speaks volumes. Unless one is deaf.

Islamic teachers drill the Q'uran by rote. That is considered to be the only knowledge a man needs to have. Not for nothing did Pope Benedict XVI aver that what is lacking in Islamic belief is reason, or any appreciation for the intellect, or the life of the mind. Don't forget, all that is required of a faithful Muslim believer is submission to Allah. That's it. The mind turns out to be quite a useless thing, on that philosophy.

But you are right, there is that rare Muslim scholar who will attack evolution theory. Notably, a Turk whose name now escapes me, but who's got a dandy website: darwinism refuted. The scholarship behind the work you'll find there seems unimpeachable.

Once upon a time, the Arabs/Muslims were among the leading scholars and scientists on the planet. Alas, Wahhabism took care of that. Nowadays "Arab scholar" or "Muslim scholar" are virually oxymorons....

You can read the full text of a typical Islamic creationism / antievolution book at the link below (click on the pic):

You'll find the occasional comment or gloss that will indicate that it is an Islamic version of creationism (especially in the online preface here a section about how evolution, not Islam, is the real source of terrorism) but for the most part the substance, the arguments, the "evidence," the tone, the rhetoric, is all but indistinguishable from American antievolutionary creationism. Evolution as the source of racism, fascism and communism; lack of transitionsal forms; evolution = materialism. It's all in there.

But you are right, there is that rare Muslim scholar who will attack evolution theory.

Baloney. You have that backwards. There are liberal Muslims that accept evolution (although, as the wiki entry notes, even many of them insist on the special creation of Man) but theologically conservative Muslims -- including ALL of the "Islamofascists" who you (supposedly) can't imagine being creationists -- virtually all reject evolution.

Show me a counter example. Show me a fundamentalist Islamist who accepts evolution. I won't hold my breath.

Check out some of the links to Islamic creationism/antievolution sites.

Stultis, let's face it: you call any person who disagrees with orthodox evolution theory a "creationist." And so does Wikipedia. I find Wikipedia to be quite "progressive" in the way it presents its subject matter -- progressive, that is, in the same sense that a Hillary Clinton or a Ted Kennedy is said to be "progressive." (Seems more like regressive to me....)

To me, a creationist involves a lot more than just being "anti-evo." Indeed, there may be creationists who don't object to evolution theory in principle (indeed, I am such a one). The objection, if there be any, is to the idea that life and biology are the result of a purely materially based, more or less accidental development. As Jacques Monod said, matter and "pure blind chance" are the root of life and its evolution. That no creationist can accept.

I really hope that the ‘08 election does not address this issue, because it’s always embarrasing to see educated politicians pretend to believe in creationism hocus-pocus in order to placate the zealots of the Republican base. If the future of this country falls into the hands of people that believe the earth is 4,000 years old, then God freakin’ help us. America is great because of our science and technology, not Biblical literalism. Do we have to have another Scopes Monkey Trial? What do you want to chuck next, the general theory of relativity, radio carbon dating, the periodic table, calculus? I hate this hillbilly nonsense.

Evolution as the source of racism, fascism and communism; lack of transitionsal forms; evolution = materialism. It's all in there.

Yeah. It's all there in actual history, too. Darwinist evolution theory -- whether Darwin foresaw this or not, and regardless of whether he'd approve it or not -- is at the core of every single "progressive movement" that has come down the pike over the past century and more.

Also, let's not forget to "Ask the Imam". A couple of the answers:

It is our belief that Allah is the creator of the universe and all its contents. The concept of evolution is un Islamic. The animals, humans, etc all were created by the command of Allah and will be created by His command. The ever changing conclusions of the scientists is sufficient of their false research.

It is permissible to use hair gel.

And Allah Knows Best

For: Mufti Ebrahim Desai

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The concept of evolution is wrong.

As Muslims, we believe that Allah created human being. We are not transformed from monkeys and apes.

and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best

Mufti Ebrahim Desai

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Quraan and the Ahaadith are very clear on this issue. Allah Ta'aala had created Adam (Alayhis Salaam) in the form of a human being. He was the first human being created in the world. Thereafter Allah Ta'aala created Hawwa (Alayha Salaam) as a wife for Adam (AS). From their relationship the human race began.

Hence the issue of evolution is not acceptable to muslims.

and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best

Mufti Ahmad Suliman
FATWA DEPT.

CHECKED & APPROVED: Mufti Ebrahim Desai

Show me a fundamentalist Islamist who accepts evolution.

Why? What exactly would that prove?

I think your premise basically boils down to: Smart people believe in evolution; dumb people (e.g., creationists and Islamofascists) do not. I do believe this is the way Richard Dawkins regards the matter. (His and Dennett's so-called "brights" vs the benighted religious believers.)

This is moving faster than I can respond, and others have said most of what I would want to say. Accepting evolution would be a rare thing for a devout Muslim.

When I say creationist, I have some rather specific minimal criteria in mind. The most critical aspect of creationism is denial that natural process can lead to speciation and have, in fact, resulted in the common descent of multi-celled life on this planet. It’s a bit more complex for single celled organisms, since genetic sharing is commonplace.

The phrase “natural processes” needs some discussion. When I use it I do not hypothesize about how or why the universe exists or why the rules are what they are. I simply assert that the behavior of things is consistent over time, and no entity reaches in to cause earthquakes, volcanoes, asteroids, or evolution. The game board is set up and the game is played by the rules. I do not rule out the possibility of miracles; I simply don’t see any reason for science to deal with them. I know of no case where science could add anything to a claim for a miraculous occurrence. Nor do I know of any large scale event, such as evolution, the requires postulating a miracle.

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.