[betty boop]

It seemed implicit in the assertion that in a discussion of TToE, Darwin's character, political views, choice of friends and associates and their character and political views, etc. are relevant to that discussion.

Why???

I don't believe that any of these things are relevant at all, if all we're doing is evaluating/discussing a scientific theory, TToE. If you want to discuss the social consequences of a theory, or the way it's been politicized (e.g., as in the public schools), that's an altogether different matter. But strictly speaking, these aspects are not scientific questions, rather matters of sociology, culture, politics.

I hold Darwin's "boosters," or popularizers, Huxley and Haeckel more responsible for such effects than Darwin himself. I don't blame Darwin for the usages his theory has been put to by people with their own agendas, right up to our own time — e.g., Richard Dawkins et al.

[tacticalogic]

I don't believe that any of these things are relevant at all, if all we're doing is evaluating/discussing a scientific theory, TToE. If you want to discuss the social consequences of a theory, or the way it's been politicized (e.g., as in the public schools), that's an altogether different matter. But strictly speaking, these aspects are not scientific questions, rather matters of sociology, culture, politics.

I agree. But that's not how it's being debated. TToE is labeled a "liberal" theory, and that label is applied to it and anyone who isn't openly hostile to it almost immediatly upon mention of it in any context.