Skip to comments.
The Gentle Darwinians - What Darwin’s Champions Won’t Mention
Commonweal ^
| March 9, 2007
| Peter Quinn
Posted on 03/08/2007 7:46:04 PM PST by ofwaihhbtn
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-193 next last
The connection between Darwin and eugenics you always knew was there is discussed in this article.
To: ofwaihhbtn
If you connect the two, then it is by choice and no logical reason.
To: ofwaihhbtn
Hatchet job alert.
3
posted on
03/08/2007 8:00:08 PM PST
by
Coyoteman
(Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
To: ofwaihhbtn
All employees failing to evolve by the Monday noon will be subjected to summary extinction.
Personnel Department.
4
posted on
03/08/2007 8:06:19 PM PST
by
GSlob
To: ofwaihhbtn
5
posted on
03/08/2007 8:06:48 PM PST
by
Buck W.
(If you push something hard enough, it will fall over.)
To: ofwaihhbtn
Bottom dollar says Peter Singer subscribes to evolutionary theory.
To: ofwaihhbtn
... Darwin is adamant about the need for the civilized races to preserve in some degree the process of natural selection, which requires the adoption of eugenic principles: This is absurd. Natural selection and eugenic principles (at least the kind of forced eugenics to which he refers) are polar opposites. With natural selection, man is not the decision-maker. With forced eugenics, he is. By practicing forced eugenics, a society does not embrace natural selection. It turns it on its head.
No matter how hard people like Quinn try, the fact will remain that Darwin was a very decent man who did not advocate forced eugenics.
7
posted on
03/08/2007 8:45:36 PM PST
by
freespirited
(Demand perfection, get Hillary.)
To: Coyoteman
Isn't funny how the very evolutionists who refuse to see any distinction between ID and creationism are the first to cry foul when the obvious connections between evolutionism and eugenics are pointed out. Your jig is about up.
8
posted on
03/08/2007 8:49:25 PM PST
by
RussP
To: ofwaihhbtn
9
posted on
03/08/2007 8:52:35 PM PST
by
WestVirginiaRebel
("...Mindless pack of trained Maoist circus seals.")
To: ofwaihhbtn
Lame logical fallacy.
How pathetic.
Yet, it represents the creationist's lack of understanding pretty well.
BTW, Hitler loved dogs, ergo dog lovers are all nazis.
10
posted on
03/08/2007 8:54:02 PM PST
by
Central Scrutiniser
(Never Let a Theocon Near a Textbook. Teach Evolution!)
To: RussP
Pardon me sir, but your fallacious reasoning is showing.
11
posted on
03/08/2007 8:54:22 PM PST
by
Boxen
(Branigan's law is like Branigan's love--Hard and fast.)
To: ofwaihhbtn
A good book to read:
The State Boys Rebellion
http://www.simonsays.com/content/content.cfm?sid=33&pid=422319
Its interesting that Germany looked to the US for its ideas on eugenics.
Excerpt from link:
Though they couldn't possible know it, the children of the Fernald State School were the victims of bad science and a newly developed bureaucracy designed to save America from the so-called "menace of the feebleminded." Beginning early in the twentieth century, United States health officials used crude versions of the modern IQ tests to identify supposedly "deficient" children and lock them away. The idea was to protect society from potential criminals and to prevent so-called undesirables from having children and degrading the American gene pool......
...... It reveals the danger in misguided science, the fearsome power of unchecked bureaucracies,
To: WorkingClassFilth
"Bottom dollar says Peter Singer subscribes to evolutionary theory."
I heard that Piltdown Man did too, but his subscription was canceled....
13
posted on
03/08/2007 8:57:45 PM PST
by
The Spirit Of Allegiance
(Public Employees: Honor Your Oaths! Defend the Constitution from Enemies--Foreign and Domestic!)
To: Central Scrutiniser
"BTW, Hitler loved dogs, ergo dog lovers are all nazis."
And how many other people like dogs?
How many believe in Eugenics?
OK, let me spoon feed this to you, moron:
The fact that Hitler liked dogs did not distinguish him from the masses. The fact that he believed in eugenics did. And his belief in eugenics was based on evolutionism -- whether you like or not.
You wouldn't know a "logical fallacy" if it bit you on the ass, and you couldn't reason your way out of a wet paper bag if your life depended on it, moron.
Sorry, but I'm just sick and tired of dealing with the mental midgets here.
14
posted on
03/08/2007 9:28:44 PM PST
by
RussP
To: wagglebee; metmom
15
posted on
03/08/2007 9:32:51 PM PST
by
little jeremiah
(Only those who thirst for truth can know truth.)
To: ofwaihhbtn
Maybe Eugenics is 'the son of Darwin?'
As described by Nicholas Wright Gillham in his A Life of Francis Galton, Major Darwin foresaw the day when eugenics would become not only a grail, a substitute for religion, as Galton had hoped, but a paramount duty whose tenets would presumably become enforceable.
The major repeated his fathers admonition that, though the crudest workings of natural selection must be mitigated by the spirit of civilization, society must encourage breeding among the best stock and prevent it among the worst without further delay.
16
posted on
03/08/2007 9:37:33 PM PST
by
RunningWolf
(2-1 Cav 1975)
To: Central Scrutiniser
Commonweal is not a "creationist" magazine.
Anyway, here's a Toyko dailies take on the debate (see how many characters you can recognize):
17
posted on
03/08/2007 9:42:29 PM PST
by
Tribune7
(A bleeding heart does nothing but ruin the carpet)
To: The Spirit Of Allegiance
I heard that Piltdown Man did too, but his subscription was canceled....
Yes he was just a fantasy of the scientific world, his only reality the name given him and the science articles/papers written for him. Periodically he re-appears with a new name, to be declared as the as 'the missing link/s' in peer reviewed articles.
18
posted on
03/08/2007 9:45:07 PM PST
by
RunningWolf
(2-1 Cav 1975)
To: RussP
Hey take it easy on him, he is giving you his best shots right up front ;)
19
posted on
03/08/2007 9:47:07 PM PST
by
RunningWolf
(2-1 Cav 1975)
To: RussP
I was pointing out how stupid your argument was by presenting an equally stupid one.
I'd explain the concept to you, but I don't think you'd get it.
Mental Midgets? Yeah, go talk to "Dr." Hovind and his scholars.
LOL
20
posted on
03/08/2007 9:47:17 PM PST
by
Central Scrutiniser
(Never Let a Theocon Near a Textbook. Teach Evolution!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-193 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson