Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Darwinism the root of the culture of death: expert
LifeSiteNews ^ | 2/17/12 | Kathleen Gilbert

Posted on 02/17/2012 4:17:50 PM PST by wagglebee

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 651-669 next last
Darwinists love to claim that their interest is science, but they are actually agents of Satan in the most deadly agenda ever pursued in the history of the world.
1 posted on 02/17/2012 4:17:58 PM PST by wagglebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cgk; Coleus; cpforlife.org; narses; Salvation; 8mmMauser
Pro-Life Ping
2 posted on 02/17/2012 4:19:03 PM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 185JHP; 230FMJ; AKA Elena; APatientMan; Albion Wilde; Aleighanne; Alexander Rubin; ...
Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]


3 posted on 02/17/2012 4:19:40 PM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Bears repeting ...

> Darwinists love to claim that their interest is science,
> but they are actually agents of Satan in the most deadly
> agenda ever pursued in the history of the world.

The complete title of Darwin’s seminal tome was ...

“On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life”

Evolutionism is the same kind of “science” as Anthropomorphic Global Warming.


4 posted on 02/17/2012 4:30:47 PM PST by Westbrook (Children do not divide your love, they multiply it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook
Here's what Darwinist atheism gets us:

Rachel Carson (author of "Silent Spring" which resulted in the DDT ban): 50-80 MILLION deaths and rising every year.

Margaret Sanger: 50 MILLION deaths worldwide EVERY YEAR (1 BILLION to 1.2 BILLION worldwide since 1900).

Stalin: 13 MILLION+ deaths.

Hitler: 12 MILLION+ deaths.

Mao: 50-80 MILLION deaths.

So, in just the last century, Darwinist atheism is responsible for the deaths of AT LEAST 1.125 BILLION INNOCENT people. (And note that this only counts the genocide that can be directly attributed to them, if the wars initiated by Stalin, Mao and Hitler were included there would be close to 100 MILLION more.)

5 posted on 02/17/2012 4:39:35 PM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

> Rachel Carson

I had forgotten about that one.

Thanks for the reminder.

These people are satanic, whether they know it or not.


6 posted on 02/17/2012 4:48:04 PM PST by Westbrook (Children do not divide your love, they multiply it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Don’t forget those evil “Geologists” And them “Physicists.” And don’t even get me started on them damned for all time “Astrophysicists” and “Chemists.”

Have these people no shame? No sense of proportion? No sense of right and wrong?


7 posted on 02/17/2012 4:51:47 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Spoiler Alert! The secret to Terra Nova: THEY ARE ALL DEAD!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

You’re right, but not enough will understand or admit to it.


8 posted on 02/17/2012 4:56:03 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

You may want to read the article.


9 posted on 02/17/2012 4:57:03 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook

Posting a creationist religious tract on other than the Religion thread is kind of like trolling don’t you think. Blaming all scientific inquiry for the abuses and inaccuracies of some is kind of like those who blame Christians in the 21st century for the inquisition. Or perhaps you would burn me at the stake while assuring me I’m damned to hell?


10 posted on 02/17/2012 4:58:29 PM PST by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Those darn physicists and their ‘theory of gravity’ (THEORY!!) that they use to help calculate the use of BOMBS! How many deaths is Newton responsible for?


11 posted on 02/17/2012 4:58:50 PM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: trisham

>>You may want to read the article<<

When that tired old strawman about TTOE leading to Eugenics was trotted out, I knew where this was going (note: there is no study of science named “Darwinism” any more than Astronomy is “Capurnicism”).

I am done here, but I wanted outside readers to know that there are many of us who understand science, how it does NOT conflict with scripture nor Christianity (or any other belief system). Clearly there are some others who are also not afraid to let their knowledge show. But many others remain silent after the Crevo wars a few years ago.


12 posted on 02/17/2012 5:07:55 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Spoiler Alert! The secret to Terra Nova: THEY ARE ALL DEAD!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

And what about heliocentrism? There’s another absolutely diabolical doctrine started by so-called `scientists.’

The Earth is the center of the universe, and these infernal allegations that it is round ... don’t get me started.

I have to go re-charge my brain-stem. Be right back!


13 posted on 02/17/2012 5:08:04 PM PST by tumblindice (Whitey-American: Taxed Enough Already)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

>>Those darn physicists and their ‘theory of gravity’ (THEORY!!) that they use to help calculate the use of BOMBS! How many deaths is Newton responsible for?
<<

I say we burn down the observatory...


14 posted on 02/17/2012 5:09:47 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Spoiler Alert! The secret to Terra Nova: THEY ARE ALL DEAD!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA; Westbrook; Dr. Brian Kopp; trisham; DJ MacWoW; little jeremiah; Coleus; narses; ...
Posting a creationist religious tract on other than the Religion thread is kind of like trolling don’t you think.

If you bothered to read the article you would see that it isn't about creationism, it is about Darwinists and their devotion to the culture of death.

Or are you trying to say that the culture of death IS a religion?

Blaming all scientific inquiry for the abuses and inaccuracies of some is kind of like those who blame Christians in the 21st century for the inquisition.

Except for the FACT that Darwinian eugenics has been used to murder over a billion innocent people.

Or perhaps you would burn me at the stake while assuring me I’m damned to hell?

When you or any of the other Darwinists can find a single post where a FReeper has EVER supported burning someone at the stake I will happily join all of the anti-FReepers at DC.

15 posted on 02/17/2012 5:10:00 PM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; floriduh voter; Sun; Golden Gate; TheOldLady; surroundedbyblue; xzins; P-Marlowe; ...
When that tired old strawman about TTOE leading to Eugenics was trotted out,

Did the Darwin family start and lead the eugenics movement for nearly a century? YES or NO.

I am done here, but I wanted outside readers to know that there are many of us who understand science,

I've noticed that Darwinists ALWAYS get uncomfortable when the deadly FACTS of Darwin's agenda are exposed. That's why Darwinists love to talk about science.

16 posted on 02/17/2012 5:14:01 PM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

“Darwinists love to claim that their interest is science, but they are actually agents of Satan in the most deadly agenda ever pursued in the history of the world. “

Are you quoting Satan directly, or reading from the manual?


17 posted on 02/17/2012 5:16:43 PM PST by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Wow. The secularist trolls are surely out tonite, aren’t they?


18 posted on 02/17/2012 5:31:29 PM PST by surroundedbyblue (Live the message of Fatima - pray & do penance!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue
They hate it when their deadly agenda is exposed, that's why Planned Parenthood likes to talk about condoms and breast cancer and plays down the fact that they murder thousands of babies every day.
19 posted on 02/17/2012 5:33:34 PM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Well I suggest you get me zapped from FR. I don’t know of anything called Darwinism or evolutionism, they sound like religions to me. In point of fact, I am opposed to abortion as I know from science that a unique human being is created at the moment of conception. Those DNA merchants of death came up with that.

The misuse of a science can not discredit science as the misuse is anti-science. Science doesn’t prove, disprove or invent values. I get my values from Christianity and truthfulness is one of them. Value of human life and all life for that matter is another.

The idea that being evolve to a normatively better condition is nonsense from the latter part of the 19th and early part of the twentieth century. If an organism survives, it reproduces. That’s all. What use that is put to by men is up to men and the value of that use can not be proven. Science may be used in a cult of death but it does not produce the cult.

A pound of c4 may be used in building a highway or attached to a terrorist’s belt. The explosion it produces is the same and a scientist built the explosive but did not dictate how it was used. The same analogy works for the theory of evolution. By the same token, the theory is not now identical to the 19th century theory, it has evolved if you will.


20 posted on 02/17/2012 5:34:30 PM PST by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA
Science may be used in a cult of death but it does not produce the cult.

The Darwin family produced, developed, and lead the eugenics movement for nearly a century. This is not an opinion, it is a statement of fact.

Divorcing the Darwin family from the evils of eugenics and focusing on science would be like crediting Hitler for the Autobahn and ignoring the Holocaust.

21 posted on 02/17/2012 5:40:46 PM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Don’t forget the Huxleys.


22 posted on 02/17/2012 5:47:56 PM PST by Tax-chick (I saw a werewolf drinking a pina colada at Trader Vic's. His hair was perfect!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; JimSEA
What do Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, “father of the sexual revolution” Alfred Kinsey, Lenin, and Hitler have in common?

I don’t know. They all kept cats as pets? They all enjoyed ice cream?

That should be reason enough to kill all cats and outlaw ice cream. /sarcasm

The Darwin family produced, developed, and lead (I think you meant “led” here, unless you are really blaming Charles Darwin for “lead poisoning¨ too) the eugenics movement for nearly a century. This is not an opinion, it is a statement of fact.

Divorcing the Darwin family from the evils of eugenics and focusing on science would be like crediting Hitler for the Autobahn and ignoring the Holocaust.

Well Hitler did build some very good roads that are still in use today by many Germans who still drive on them in their VW’s.

And two out of four of Ronald Regan’s kids are stark raving lunatic leftists. Just saying.

23 posted on 02/17/2012 5:59:25 PM PST by MD Expat in PA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

With you 100%. Kooks give this site a bad name.


24 posted on 02/17/2012 6:07:18 PM PST by strider44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

More despicable slander of science.


25 posted on 02/17/2012 6:29:21 PM PST by Salman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I would divorce the theory of evolution from the Darwin family. There was no ownership of the theory any more than by Wallace or Huxley. All made observations and made a hypothesis that became a theory that has and will change in many aspects. All of the men made mistakes and had their own set of values. Interesting history but not central to today’s science.

Eugenics was and is a horrible set of ideas and practices. Like AGW today, men twisted science to justify their politics. Their experimentation was ill informed and twisted by racial and ethnic hatreds. Much of what Sanger did fit with her racial and class bigotry. Like others she used and twisted the science of the day to fit. Good grief, so called scientists counted bumps on people’s heads and measured skulls to support preconceived prejudices.

Today’s science is in danger of similar misuse. Only good science will out bad science. Already the politicized “scientists” are moving to climate change over global warming which is a move in the right direction. I’d like to see a well controlled study of just what happens to the co2 we are putting out but as long as worshipers of Gaia prevail, that isn’t likely.

Today’s moves toward euthanasia and population control by abortion have more to do with utilitarianism than science. Stalin and Mao produced their own perverted religions to justify their killing and we are moving closer to that religion — Marxism.


26 posted on 02/17/2012 6:31:29 PM PST by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
expert

Hmmmmm.

27 posted on 02/17/2012 6:34:13 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; GodGunsGuts; Fichori; tpanther; Gordon Greene; Ethan Clive Osgoode; betty boop; ...

ping


28 posted on 02/17/2012 6:34:40 PM PST by metmom (For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
If one accepts evolution as a necessary and inevitable force in nature then on what basis would a person object to ‘weeding out the unfit’?
29 posted on 02/17/2012 6:57:04 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

INDEED.


30 posted on 02/17/2012 8:22:03 PM PST by Quix (Times are a changin' INSURE you have believed in your heart & confessed Jesus as Lord Come NtheFlesh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I call Godwin.


31 posted on 02/17/2012 8:28:58 PM PST by Oztrich Boy (Society is well governed when the people obey the magistrates, and the magistrates obey the law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; betty boop; spirited irish; metmom
I've noticed that Darwinists ALWAYS get uncomfortable when the deadly FACTS of Darwin's agenda are exposed. That's why Darwinists love to talk about science.

Indeed.

Marx and Engels, for instance, saw the value of it for their own agendas. Sir Francis Galton (Darwin's cousin) was the one who coined the term "eugenics."

Jeepers when one reduces human beings to the same level as all animals, many things that are normal in breeding of livestock and companion animals can be applied. Indeed, were applied.

Thank you so much for the ping!

32 posted on 02/17/2012 8:48:09 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
EVERYONE needs to watch the segment on Darwinism from Ben Stein's movie "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed." Here's the six minute excerpt posted at MetCafe: The Dark Legacy Of Charles Darwin - 150 Years Later
33 posted on 02/17/2012 9:24:39 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; wagglebee; Alamo-Girl; betty boop

“Don’t forget those evil “Geologists” And them “Physicists.”

Spirited: Ideas have consequences precisely because all men really do have two sides, a dark side easily seduced by evil hence prone to doing wrong and a light side, defined here as an unsullied conscience in search of moral good.

Geology and physics are not deviously disguised Godless cosmogonies as Darwinism is, therefore do not pose the danger that Darwinism poses.

Darwinism is not empirical science but rather a metaphysical evolutionary cosmogony whose tap-root stretches back to the Enuma Elish, the ancient evolutionary cosmogony of Sumeria and Babylonia.

Symbolically, Darwinism is Sauron’s One Ring of power. It’s immediate appeal is to the dark side of man because it holds that while all mem evolved out of pre-existing pond scum, some evolved men are nevertheless superior to the all others due to a predestination-process known as natural selection.

The greatest irony of all is that Darwinism denies man’s sin nature out of one side of its mouth, while out of the other loudly proclaiming his guilt by holding up a bright blood-red neon-arrow blinking out the message: man is a liar, thief, and murderer guilty of enslaving torturing and murderering millions of men, women, and children.

One of the chief lies of our time is this: Darwinism is science.


34 posted on 02/18/2012 1:52:18 AM PST by spirited irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
When that tired old strawman about TTOE leading to Eugenics was trotted out, I knew where this was going (note: there is no study of science named “Darwinism” any more than Astronomy is “Capurnicism”). I am done here, but I wanted outside readers to know that there are many of us who understand science, how it does NOT conflict with scripture nor Christianity (or any other belief system). Clearly there are some others who are also not afraid to let their knowledge show. But many others remain silent after the Crevo wars a few years ago.

TTOE is anti-Creator. Darwinists would not demand the removal of the Creator from their houses of worship IF the TTOE did not conflict with the Scripture. Oh, Scripture does not claim or even hint this earth is young. Liberals love using that unholy scientific methodology and the blind are rooting around for acorns.

35 posted on 02/18/2012 1:58:40 AM PST by Just mythoughts (Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: spirited irish; betty boop; freedumb2003; wagglebee
Thank you so much for sharing your insights, dear spirited irish!

Darwinism is not empirical science but rather a metaphysical evolutionary cosmogony whose tap-root stretches back to the Enuma Elish, the ancient evolutionary cosmogony of Sumeria and Babylonia.

Theories in physics and chemistry can usually be subjected to empirical tests or observations. More importantly, the theories are subjected to many attempts to falsify them thus increasing our confidence as they survive such attempts (Popper).

Evolution, by contrast, would fall in the historical sciences category - along the same lines as anthropology, archeology and Egyptology. The theory is a "just so" story built around spotty evidence (quantizations) in the geological record (a continuum.)

In the former sciences - the hard sciences - the absence of evidence is evidence of absence. In the historical sciences, the reverse is true - after all, the record is spotty at best.

And so the historical sciences get away with making a lot of claims where validity is granted based on the credentials of the speaker or the popularity of the claim among his peers. There are few means to falsify such claims by objective observation or empirical tests.

And so many people take their claims as confidently as if it were spoken by a physicist or chemist. But they are not comparable and should not be valued the same.

It is absolutely tragic, in my view, that evolution theory was taken as scientifically credible reasoning to devalue human life whether via socialism, communism, sorting, culling, killing, breeding, abortion, infanticide or other eugenics - or affects of atheism and extreme animal rights activism.

36 posted on 02/18/2012 9:45:59 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Thanks, mom, for the beep!
37 posted on 02/18/2012 1:07:58 PM PST by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change; wagglebee
If one accepts evolution as a necessary and inevitable force in nature then on what basis would a person object to ‘weeding out the unfit’?

It rather depends upon whom it is doing the defining of “unfit.” Whether or not “one accepts evolution as a necessary and inevitable force in nature.” Don’t you think?
For instance, we can imagine that most 0bmatrons would be pleased to define Conservative Christians, and most Conservatives in general, as “unfit.”

Surely, other examples come easily to mind.

38 posted on 02/18/2012 1:25:42 PM PST by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS

Darwinism defines the “unfit”. Whatever doesn’t survive was unfit.


39 posted on 02/18/2012 1:32:38 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
Darwinism defines the “unfit”. Whatever doesn’t survive was unfit.

I understood “Darwinism” to not exist (according to all the best representatives of Science). Do you, perchance, have in mind the Darwinian Theory of Evolution and its logical corollary, the theory of the survival of the fittest)?

But, using your expression “Darwinism” for the moment, permit me to observe that “Darwinism” possesses no personality and lacks the ability to define anything. It is those who use the term who define the “unfit.” Defining “the unfit” is a favorite pastime of Darwinian mullahs and imans, so does your horizon expand to include religious and political Darwinism, in which case we would have to declare the Aztecs and the ancient Egyptians “unfit,” or does it have no connotations other than scientific, and can therefore lead us to no religious or political conclusions?

40 posted on 02/18/2012 3:58:52 PM PST by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS
Permit me to suggest your post is pettifoggery.

The term “Darwinism” is used by supporters of the theory of biological evolution and as used here is obviously the intended meaning.

Yes, it, Darwinism, can define just as it can be said “the law defines legal and illegal,” or some act as falling under proscription.

Of course anyone can grab the phrase, “survival of the fittest” and apply to whatever they wish with the same desire to appear to appeal to an immutable force that is functioning in the background.

But as in the case of biological Darwinism it is no more than saying, “If you're so smart, howscum you ain't rich?”.

It is both self justification and self definition. What doesn't survive wasn't “fit” to survive.

41 posted on 02/18/2012 5:41:58 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
Permit me to suggest your post is pettifoggery.

Be my guest, by all means. But I think your appellation to be misplaced. The briefest perusal of merely some of the excerpts of antagonist comments (speaking of pettifoggery) on the thread’s main thesis should be sufficient to illustrate that Mendelian genetics is not at the heart of these discussions:

Don’t forget those evil ‘Geologists’ And them ‘Physicists.’ And don’t even get me started on them damned for all time ‘Astrophysicists’ and ‘Chemists.’
Or perhaps you would burn me at the stake while assuring me I’m damned to hell?
Those darn physicists and their ‘theory of gravity’ that they use to help calculate the use of BOMBS!
When that tired old strawman about TTOE leading to Eugenics was trotted out, I knew where this was going (note: there is no study of science named “Darwinism” any more than Astronomy is “Capurnicism”)
And what about heliocentrism? There’s another absolutely diabolical doctrine started by so-called ‘scientists.’
The Earth is the center of the universe, and these infernal allegations that it is round ... don’t get me started.
I say we burn down the observatory...
Well I suggest you get me zapped from FR. I don’t know of anything called Darwinism or evolutionism, they sound like religions to me.

The historical record is pretty clear that what so exited Marx about Darwin’s magnificent insight was that he saw in the theory a confirmation of his (Marx’s) thesis that God does not exist. A number of modern eminent scientists, such as Richard Dawkins, have carried this idea even further in proposing that the question of God’s existence is an issue for Science (we must assume he means all of science) to determine, and that the answer is, no, God does not exist. Thus has the argument of all scientists of Atheist persuasion become that science generally, and evolution specifically “proves” that God does not exist.

What I find more than passing strange is that, of all the laws and theories discovered and developed by Science, more than any other it is the Theory of Evolution that has inspired so many eminent scientists to conclude that; 1) No gods worth having exist; 2) no life after death exists; 3) no ultimate foundation for ethics exists; 4) no ultimate meaning in life exists; and 5) human free will is nonexistent. And, remarkably, all this in blatant defiance of their (the scientists’) own rules of scientific methodology.

In fact, a resort to Science generally, and Evolution specifically, has become all Liberalism’s default position in its ongoing effort to deny the existence of the Judeo-Christian tradition in Western Civilization culture, and the marvel of American Exceptionalism. It is not Science, but Christianity, Western Civilization and American Exceptionalism that are under attack in our society, and it is the corruptions and perversions of Science that are being used as a primary weapon attacking Christianity, Western Civilization and American Exceptionalism. Indeed, all Liberalism (that is, all Socialist/Marxist thought) seemly stands ready now to proclaim all three “unfit.” Even 0bama, himself, has deemed it proper to recently proclaim that the free enterprise system, the very rock of Christianity, Western Civilization and American Exceptionalism, has never been “fit.”

Those who come into this forum under the color of defending Science would do well to direct their fire at the corruption of the science of “climate change” and at the perversions of science that it claims “proves” God does not exist. We have to think that the fact that they do not do so is no accident.

Of course anyone can grab the phrase, “survival of the fittest” and apply to whatever they wish with the same desire to appear to appeal to an immutable force that is functioning in the background.

Of course. So you do understand (and apparently agree with) my point.

So does your horizon expand to include religious and political Darwinism, or does Darwinism, for you, have no connotations other than scientific, with no following religious or political conclusions?

42 posted on 02/19/2012 9:34:30 AM PST by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: All
Pinged from Terri Dailies


43 posted on 02/19/2012 10:37:35 AM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA

Amen, brother.


44 posted on 02/19/2012 12:16:58 PM PST by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

As a scientist, I object strongly to the characterization of the central theory of my discipline as a crackpot religion. There is, in fact, no religious belief called “Darwinism”. Nor is there a branch of science called “Darwinism”. Unless there is Newtonism, Einsteinism, Gallileoism, etc. Or would those be religious beliefs?

Some atheists might try to use the theory of evolution as “proof” of the nonexistance of God, but the ToE cannot prove that any more than any other branch of science.

I don’t need to point out that the use/misuse of science is completely in the hands of the scientist. Several people have already pointed that out in this thread.


45 posted on 02/19/2012 12:35:35 PM PST by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: exDemMom; trisham; DJ MacWoW; little jeremiah; Coleus; narses; Lesforlife; EternalVigilance; ...
As a scientist, I object strongly to the characterization of the central theory of my discipline as a crackpot religion.

Are you speaking of the theory of evolution or Darwinism as a whole?

There is, in fact, no religious belief called “Darwinism”.

Religion is defined as a system of beliefs.

EVERYONE has a system of beliefs by which they run their lives and EVERYONE, whether they will admit it or or even aware of it, believes that their system of beliefs is superior to all others. Now, this does not mean that a person's declared religion is actually their governing system of beliefs, but the FACT is that every person has something that they devoutly worship whether it's God, Satan, science, their own intellect or something else.

Unless there is Newtonism, Einsteinism, Gallileoism, etc. Or would those be religious beliefs?

See above.

Some atheists might try to use the theory of evolution as “proof” of the nonexistance of God, but the ToE cannot prove that any more than any other branch of science.

I learned years ago not to really concern myself with evolution. While evolution may be the "public face" of Darwinism, it has ALWAYS been a secondary concern to Darwinists. What they have done is to USE evolution to justify their evil agenda, Hitler's idea of a "master race" is nothing more than a restatement of "survival of the fittest."

Moreover, I don't see where Darwinists have ever really spent much time trying to prove the nonexistence of God; however, they have spent a great deal of time playing god with the entire world.

I don’t need to point out that the use/misuse of science is completely in the hands of the scientist.

No, but the CORE belief of Darwinism is eugenics and eugenics isn't science at all, it is an evil philosophy that has ravaged the world for over a century.

I posted this the other day, but here's what Darwinist atheism gets us:

Rachel Carson (author of "Silent Spring" which resulted in the DDT ban): 50-80 MILLION deaths and rising every year.

Margaret Sanger: 50 MILLION deaths worldwide EVERY YEAR (1 BILLION to 1.2 BILLION worldwide since 1900).

Stalin: 13 MILLION+ deaths.

Hitler: 12 MILLION+ deaths.

Mao: 50-80 MILLION deaths.

So, in just the last century, Darwinist atheism is responsible for the deaths of AT LEAST 1.125 BILLION INNOCENT people. (And note that this only counts the genocide that can be directly attributed to them, if the wars initiated by Stalin, Mao and Hitler were included there would be close to 100 MILLION more.)

If you research the Darwin family (especially Francis Galton and Leonard Darwin), you will see that many abandoned scientific pursuits early on and embraced eugenics. It is IMPOSSIBLE to divorce the Darwin family from eugenics and to pretend that this isn't their true "religion" would require one to totally ignore over a century of evil.

46 posted on 02/20/2012 6:20:58 AM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; lilycicero; MaryLou1; glock rocks; JPG; Graewoulf; VinceASA; Monkey Face; RIghtwardHo; ..
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.


47 posted on 02/20/2012 6:30:50 AM PST by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
I learned years ago not to really concern myself with evolution. While evolution may be the "public face" of Darwinism, it has ALWAYS been a secondary concern to Darwinists. What they have done is to USE evolution to justify their evil agenda, Hitler's idea of a "master race" is nothing more than a restatement of "survival of the fittest."

Indeed - it was a breeding programs like we use for livestock to get the best inheritable traits.

Thank you so much for sharing your insights, dear brother in Christ!

48 posted on 02/20/2012 6:35:07 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
Indeed - it was a breeding programs like we use for livestock to get the best inheritable traits.

Excellent point.

God gave man dominion over animals, so it is permissible to do this, but even then it's an imperfect science. Look at horse racing, there hasn't been a Triple Crown winner in over thirty years; however, the science behind breeding (genetics, etc.), veterinary medicine, and nutrition are light years beyond what they were in the 1970s.

We will NEVER achieve perfection, but we can accept that we are perfect in that He created each of us EXACTLY THE WAY He wanted to.

49 posted on 02/20/2012 6:43:53 AM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
No, but the CORE belief of Darwinism is eugenics and eugenics isn't science at all, it is an evil philosophy that has ravaged the world for over a century.

Once again, there is no religion of Darwinism. As far as I can tell, the term is used to try to discredit a theory of science that *some* people feel somehow threatens Christianity. I do have faith that, eventually, people will get over this perceived threat to Christianity, just like they got over the supposed antitheistic theory of heliocentrism. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the Catholic church un-excommunicated Galileo, within the last few decades.

Science concerns itself purely with what can be observed and measured in a systematic fashion. It does not, and cannot, concern itself with the metaphysical. We do not, and never will, have the ability to definitively prove or disprove the existence of God. Anyone who tries to claim that science proves that God doesn't exist (whether they're using the ToE or some other theory as their justification) is a liar.

Furthermore, the use of science as a rationale for committing atrocities is not a condemnation of science. Someone who is set on committing atrocities and who has the power is going to do so, no matter what. It isn't because of some pseudoreligion called "Darwinism" that Stalin, Lenin, Hitler, Pol-Pot, etc., committed their atrocities. They did that because they were fundamentally evil people, drunk with their own power.

If studying or using the theory of evolution has some strange power to turn people into monsters, then I must ask: why aren't thousands of scientists like myself busy committing atrocities right this minute? Could it be because our sense of morality does not come from the scientific theories that guide our research in the lab, but comes from our families and society?

One last point. Those of us who make science our careers do not worship science, any more than musicians worship music or accountants worship ledgers. It's just a profession.

50 posted on 02/20/2012 7:20:40 AM PST by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 651-669 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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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