Religions > Atheism > Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits Leading DarwinistDawkins
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Sound of Trumpet" |
| Date: |
14 Dec 2007 04:49:42 AM |
| Object: |
Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits Leading DarwinistDawkins |
http://www.codemonkeyramblings.com/2007/11/who_would_have_thought_that_ap.php
Who would have thought that applying Darwinism to humanity would lead
to cruelty?
By MikeT on November 2, 2007 12:13 AM
Dawkins admits that his fundamental truth about the world is pretty
ugly when society lives according to it:
As irksome as Richard Dawkins can sometimes be, one must nevertheless
admire his occasional outbursts of honesty. Over at First Things Fr.
Ed Oakes refers to an interview Dawkins gave to an Austrian newspaper,
Die Presse (July 30, 2005), in which he said: "No decent person wants
to live in a society that works according to Darwinian laws... A
Darwinian society would be a fascist state."
Atheists like Dawkins really show with statements like this that they
are a very schizophrenic lot. They believe a fundamental truth that is
cruel and cold toward human life, then suggest that we simply ignore
it (assuming Darwinism be true). This is itself like a form of heresy
when you think about it because it requires an atheist to acknowledge
an unpleasant, but true, fundamental truth of Darwinism, and then
preach against it. Now, when a Christian goes out and espouses the
killing of the poor, he or she is being a heretic. When an atheist
"knows" that Darwin was fundamentally right, but then advocates
fundamental equality between the best of society, and the very worse,
he or she is committing the same sort of act, only in a way that is
less obviously damaging to freedom.
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits LeadingDarwinist Dawkins |
14 Dec 2007 05:50:39 AM |
|
|
On 14 Dec, 10:49, Sound of Trumpet <sound_of_trum...@hotpop.com>
wrote:
http://www.codemonkeyramblings.com/2007/11/who_would_have_thought_tha...
Who would have thought that applying Darwinism to humanity would lead
to cruelty?
By MikeT on November 2, 2007 12:13 AM
Dawkins admits that his fundamental truth about the world is pretty
ugly when society lives according to it:
As irksome as Richard Dawkins can sometimes be, one must nevertheless
admire his occasional outbursts of honesty. Over at First Things Fr.
Ed Oakes refers to an interview Dawkins gave to an Austrian newspaper,
Die Presse (July 30, 2005), in which he said: "No decent person wants
to live in a society that works according to Darwinian laws... A
Darwinian society would be a fascist state."
Atheists like Dawkins really show with statements like this that they
are a very schizophrenic lot. They believe a fundamental truth that is
cruel and cold toward human life,
Gibberish. "Cold" and "Cruel" are human concepts. The universe, and
evolution, knows nothing of them. One might as well argue that cancer
is "cruel". Cancer is not conscious...it is not "cruel". Because
we don't like a fact doesn't mean it isn't a fact.
then suggest that we simply ignore
it (assuming Darwinism be true). This is itself like a form of heresy
when you think about it because it requires an atheist to acknowledge
an unpleasant, but true, fundamental truth of Darwinism, and then
preach against it.
Drooling nonsense. Dawkins was talking in a metaphorical way about a
process against which our animal instincts, modified by our
intelligence and our perception of ourselves as a species, are biased:
we *want* our genes to continue. In any case, running a society along
"survival of the fittest" lines is, by definition, impossible:
evolution is an unconscious process, societal rules are produced by
conscious creatures.
Now, when a Christian goes out and espouses the
killing of the poor, he or she is being a heretic. When an atheist
"knows" that Darwin was fundamentally right, but then advocates
fundamental equality between the best of society, and the very worse,
he or she is committing the same sort of act, only in a way that is
less obviously damaging to freedom.
Ludicrous, meaningless word-salad. Why is so often the case that
people whose intelligence and command of language is very poor equate
clumsy grammatical constructions with eloquence? Anyone?
Steve
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lucifer" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits LeadingDarwinist Dawkins |
14 Dec 2007 05:47:07 AM |
|
|
On Dec 14, 10:49 am, Sound of Trumpet <sound_of_trum...@hotpop.com>
wrote:
http://www.codemonkeyramblings.com/2007/11/who_would_have_thought_tha...
Who would have thought that applying Darwinism to humanity would lead
to cruelty?
Anyone who knows about natural selection. What is a s cientific truth
is not necessarily a societal ideal. Natural selection happens, but we
shouldn't aim to emphasise it in society, just because it is natural,
doesn't mean it is nice.
--
Lucifer the Unsubtle, EAC Librarian of Dark Tomes of Excessive Evil
and General Purpose Igor
The Anti-Theist, BAAWA Lowly Evilmeister and tamer of the Demon Duck
of Doom
Convicted by Earthquack
"Don't worry, I won't bite.......hard"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits LeadingDarwinist Dawkins |
14 Dec 2007 06:12:29 AM |
|
|
On Dec 14, 6:47 am, Lucifer <wyrdol...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Dec 14, 10:49 am, Sound of Trumpet <sound_of_trum...@hotpop.com>
wrote:
http://www.codemonkeyramblings.com/2007/11/who_would_have_thought_tha...
Who would have thought that applying Darwinism to humanity would lead
to cruelty?
Anyone who knows about natural selection. What is a s cientific truth
is not necessarily a societal ideal. Natural selection happens, but we
shouldn't aim to emphasise it in society, just because it is natural,
doesn't mean it is nice.
I must disagree that applying Darwinism to humanity would lead to
cruelty. Natural selection does NOT lead per se to unniceness. Some
very successful animals have evolved considerable social complexity
and exhibit compassion towards each other including instincts to
protect the weak. Dogs and wolves, for example. Also elephants and
cetaceans and pinnipeds. Also primates (wait, that's us!!).
Chimpanzees have been observed to drown in their efforts to rescue a
fellow chimpanzee that is drowning. Sounds like something you or I
might do if we were particularly brave. Biologists should emphasize
this point and get rid of the layman concept of Nature-red-in-tooth-
and-claw.
I have always been vastly amused by the pretension of religious
arseholes like SoT that lack of religion leads to nihilism. I don't
see too many nihilistic elephants or wolves whose atheism leads them
to an immoral disregard of the fellows' well-being. If the truth be
told, some of my favorite people have four legs and pointy snouts.
Each and every one of them is atheist. Dogs, of course, have been
selected for amiability by millenia of human breeding. But the same
amiability is largely found in wild dogs and wolves.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lucifer" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits LeadingDarwinist Dawkins |
14 Dec 2007 09:43:06 PM |
|
|
On Dec 14, 12:12 pm, Mike <mat...@hofstra.edu> wrote:
On Dec 14, 6:47 am, Lucifer <wyrdol...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Dec 14, 10:49 am, Sound of Trumpet <sound_of_trum...@hotpop.com>
wrote:
http://www.codemonkeyramblings.com/2007/11/who_would_have_thought_tha...
Who would have thought that applying Darwinism to humanity would lead
to cruelty?
Anyone who knows about natural selection. What is a s cientific truth
is not necessarily a societal ideal. Natural selection happens, but we
shouldn't aim to emphasise it in society, just because it is natural,
doesn't mean it is nice.
I must disagree that applying Darwinism to humanity would lead to
cruelty. Natural selection does NOT lead per se to unniceness. Some
very successful animals have evolved considerable social complexity
and exhibit compassion towards each other including instincts to
protect the weak. Dogs and wolves, for example. Also elephants and
cetaceans and pinnipeds. Also primates (wait, that's us!!).
Chimpanzees have been observed to drown in their efforts to rescue a
fellow chimpanzee that is drowning. Sounds like something you or I
might do if we were particularly brave. Biologists should emphasize
this point and get rid of the layman concept of Nature-red-in-tooth-
and-claw.
I have always been vastly amused by the pretension of religious
arseholes like SoT that lack of religion leads to nihilism. I don't
see too many nihilistic elephants or wolves whose atheism leads them
to an immoral disregard of the fellows' well-being. If the truth be
told, some of my favorite people have four legs and pointy snouts.
Each and every one of them is atheist. Dogs, of course, have been
selected for amiability by millenia of human breeding. But the same
amiability is largely found in wild dogs and wolves.
True, true. I would argue that that is how an inbuilt, instinctive
sense of right and wrong, and morality, evolved. Pure natural
selection as a social model, without elements of group selection,
would however be horrible to live with, and I think that is what
Dawkins was trying to say.
--
Lucifer the Unsubtle, EAC Librarian of Dark Tomes of Excessive Evil
and General Purpose Igor
The Anti-Theist, BAAWA Lowly Evilmeister and tamer of the Demon Duck
of Doom
Convicted by Earthquack
"Don't worry, I won't bite.......hard"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits LeadingDarwinist Dawkins |
17 Dec 2007 09:11:38 AM |
|
|
On Dec 14, 2:49 am, Sound of Trumpet <sound_of_trum...@hotpop.com>
wrote:
http://www.codemonkeyramblings.com/2007/11/who_would_have_thought_tha...
Who would have thought that applying Darwinism to humanity would lead
to cruelty?
<snip>
I must say it is ironic that someone who believes that unrepentant
sinners are sent to hell to burn in torment for eternity finds any
finite system "cruel".
John
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Quadibloc" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits LeadingDarwinist Dawkins |
14 Dec 2007 08:05:53 AM |
|
|
On Dec 14, 3:49 am, Sound of Trumpet <sound_of_trum...@hotpop.com>
wrote:
Now, when a Christian goes out and espouses the
killing of the poor, he or she is being a heretic. When an atheist
"knows" that Darwin was fundamentally right, but then advocates
fundamental equality between the best of society, and the very worse,
he or she is committing the same sort of act, only in a way that is
less obviously damaging to freedom.
You are clearly in error here.
In religion, God is an intentional Actor, Who wishes humanity to
behave in a certain way. Thus, one may speak of obeying God or
choosing to disobey Him.
If one instead believes that life originated by the pitiless and
ruthless workings of Natural Selection, that involves no
acknowledgement whatsoever of any obligation to imitate Nature in this
regard. Nature may be cruel, but we, who have intelligence and
intention, unlike Nature, can still be considered as being morally
obligated to be kind.
Nature just is, and we need not fear that it will be miffed if we do
not copy its workings.
John Savard
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hatter" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits LeadingDarwinist Dawkins |
14 Dec 2007 08:45:15 AM |
|
|
On Dec 14, 9:05 am, Quadibloc <jsav...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
On Dec 14, 3:49 am, Sound of Trumpet <sound_of_trum...@hotpop.com>
wrote:
Now, when a Christian goes out and espouses the
killing of the poor, he or she is being a heretic. When an atheist
"knows" that Darwin was fundamentally right, but then advocates
fundamental equality between the best of society, and the very worse,
he or she is committing the same sort of act, only in a way that is
less obviously damaging to freedom.
You are clearly in error here.
That last word was unneeded, as the first five apply to every one of
his posts.
Hatter
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits Leading Darwinist Dawkins |
14 Dec 2007 02:34:12 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 02:49:42 -0800 (PST), Sound of Trumpet
<sound_of_trumpet@hotpop.com> wrote:
http://www.codemonkeyramblings.com/2007/11/who_would_have_thought_that_ap.php
Who would have thought that applying Darwinism to humanity would lead
to cruelty?
By MikeT on November 2, 2007 12:13 AM
Dawkins admits that his fundamental truth about the world is pretty
ugly when society lives according to it:
As irksome as Richard Dawkins can sometimes be, one must nevertheless
admire his occasional outbursts of honesty. Over at First Things Fr.
Ed Oakes refers to an interview Dawkins gave to an Austrian newspaper,
Die Presse (July 30, 2005), in which he said: "No decent person wants
to live in a society that works according to Darwinian laws... A
Darwinian society would be a fascist state."
Atheists like Dawkins really show with statements like this that they
are a very schizophrenic lot. They believe a fundamental truth that is
cruel and cold toward human life, then suggest that we simply ignore
it (assuming Darwinism be true).
It is, in fact, true that the Universe is utterly indifferent to human
life. Human beings, however, are not, so we order our societies to
protect ourselves against the cold facts of nature. Where's the
problem?
---
"Faith may not move mountains, but you should see what it does to skyscrapers..."
.
|
|
|
| User: "CortxVortx CortxVortx@restmass" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits Leading Darwinist Dawkins |
16 Dec 2007 09:13:30 PM |
|
|
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in
news:57p5m31pp3s5p2vqrpf8uf2gimnvfpgv22@4ax.com:
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 02:49:42 -0800 (PST), Sound of Trumpet
<sound_of_trumpet@hotpop.com> wrote:
http://www.codemonkeyramblings.com/2007/11/who_would_have_thought_that_
ap.php
Who would have thought that applying Darwinism to humanity would lead
to cruelty?
By MikeT on November 2, 2007 12:13 AM
Dawkins admits that his fundamental truth about the world is pretty
ugly when society lives according to it:
As irksome as Richard Dawkins can sometimes be, one must nevertheless
admire his occasional outbursts of honesty. Over at First Things Fr.
Ed Oakes refers to an interview Dawkins gave to an Austrian newspaper,
Die Presse (July 30, 2005), in which he said: "No decent person wants
to live in a society that works according to Darwinian laws... A
Darwinian society would be a fascist state."
Atheists like Dawkins really show with statements like this that they
are a very schizophrenic lot. They believe a fundamental truth that is
cruel and cold toward human life, then suggest that we simply ignore
it (assuming Darwinism be true).
It is, in fact, true that the Universe is utterly indifferent to human
life. Human beings, however, are not, so we order our societies to
protect ourselves against the cold facts of nature. Where's the
problem?
---
"Faith may not move mountains, but you should see what it does to
skyscrapers..."
The moron MikeT references VoxDay in his comments section (which, by the
way, you have to subscribe to comment on -- typical of Christer-cons).
No surprise that he "fundamentally" misunderstands Dawkins' point.
--
"Evolution can be mean -- there's no 'dumb-*****' vaccine." -- Jimmy
Buffett
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits LeadingDarwinistDawkins |
14 Dec 2007 10:16:19 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 02:49:42 -0800, Sound of Trumpet wrote:
<garbage as usual>
Now, the actual article in German:
http://diepresse.com/home/techscience/wissenschaft/155678/index.do
Discussion in English:
http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/10/logic-v-intelli.html
Actual quote (translated):
"No self respecting person would want to live in a Society that operates
according to Darwinian laws. I am an passionate Darwinist, when it
involves explaining the development of life. However, I am a passionate
anti-Darwinist when it involves the kind of society in which we want to
live. A Darwinian State would be a Fascist state."
Never trust a creationist nor a theist bearing ellipses.
Dawkins is talking about "Social Darwinism" which has never had anything
to do with Darwinism nor evolutionary theory despite the name. Most of
the concept can be traced to Herbert Spencer who began publishing his
ideas *before* Darwin and his ideas have more in common with Lamarck than
Darwin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darwinism
"Social Darwinism" is not and cannot be derived from Darwinism. Period.
The very term "Social Darwinism" was popularized in 1944 by an historian
and used by critics of the eugenics and racism of regimes such as the
Nazis.
In short, as usual, Squawking Turd and the people he quotes are, in a
word, liars.
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"Morality is doing what is right, no matter what you're
told. Religion is doing what you're told, not matter what
is right."
- Jerry Sturdivant
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wexford" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits LeadingDarwinist Dawkins |
16 Dec 2007 10:10:02 PM |
|
|
On Dec 14, 11:16 am, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 02:49:42 -0800, Sound of Trumpet wrote:
<garbage as usual>
Now, the actual article in German:
http://diepresse.com/home/techscience/wissenschaft/155678/index.do
Discussion in English:
http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/10/logic-v-intelli.html
Actual quote (translated):
"No self respecting person would want to live in a Society that operates
according to Darwinian laws. I am an passionate Darwinist, when it
involves explaining the development of life. However, I am a passionate
anti-Darwinist when it involves the kind of society in which we want to
live. A Darwinian State would be a Fascist state."
Never trust a creationist nor a theist bearing ellipses.
Dawkins is talking about "Social Darwinism" which has never had anything
to do with Darwinism nor evolutionary theory despite the name. Most of
the concept can be traced to Herbert Spencer who began publishing his
ideas *before* Darwin and his ideas have more in common with Lamarck than
Darwin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darwinism
"Social Darwinism" is not and cannot be derived from Darwinism. Period.
The very term "Social Darwinism" was popularized in 1944 by an historian
and used by critics of the eugenics and racism of regimes such as the
Nazis.
In short, as usual, Squawking Turd and the people he quotes are, in a
word, liars.
I hesitate to correct you, my friend, but Social Darwinism predated
the Nazis. It was being espoused in the 19th century. Here's the entry
from Encarta:
"Social Darwinism, term coined in the late 19th century to describe
the idea that humans, like animals and plants, compete in a struggle
for existence in which natural selection results in "survival of the
fittest." Social Darwinists base their beliefs on theories of
evolution developed by British naturalist Charles Darwin. Some social
Darwinists argue that governments should not interfere with human
competition by attempting to regulate the economy or cure social ills
such as poverty. Instead, they advocate a laissez-faire political and
economic system that favors competition and self-interest in social
and business affairs. Social Darwinists typically deny that they
advocate a "law of the jungle." But most propose arguments that
justify imbalances of power between individuals, races, and nations
because they consider some people more fit to survive than others."
Rich Christians, by the way, lapped it up. It justified their gross
wealth and their neglect of the poor who would, after all, "always be
with us." Survival of the Fittest was God's way of separating the
wheat from the chaff.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits LeadingDarwinist Dawkins |
18 Dec 2007 09:22:54 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 20:10:02 -0800, Wexford wrote:
On Dec 14, 11:16 am, "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote:
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 02:49:42 -0800, Sound of Trumpet wrote:
<garbage as usual>
Now, the actual article in German:
http://diepresse.com/home/techscience/wissenschaft/155678/index.do
Discussion in English:
http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/10/logic-v-intelli.html
Actual quote (translated):
"No self respecting person would want to live in a Society that
operates according to Darwinian laws. I am an passionate Darwinist,
when it involves explaining the development of life. However, I am a
passionate anti-Darwinist when it involves the kind of society in which
we want to live. A Darwinian State would be a Fascist state."
Never trust a creationist nor a theist bearing ellipses.
Dawkins is talking about "Social Darwinism" which has never had
anything to do with Darwinism nor evolutionary theory despite the name.
Most of the concept can be traced to Herbert Spencer who began
publishing his ideas *before* Darwin and his ideas have more in common
with Lamarck than Darwin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darwinism
"Social Darwinism" is not and cannot be derived from Darwinism. Period.
The very term "Social Darwinism" was popularized in 1944 by an
historian and used by critics of the eugenics and racism of regimes
such as the Nazis.
In short, as usual, Squawking Turd and the people he quotes are, in a
word, liars.
I hesitate to correct you,
Hesitate? Why on earth for?
my friend, but Social Darwinism predated the
Nazis. It was being espoused in the 19th century. Here's the entry from
Encarta:
Well, before going on, note I said "popularized". The article I skimmed
didn't mention when the term was coined.
"Social Darwinism, term coined in the late 19th century to describe the
idea that humans, like animals and plants, compete in a struggle for
existence in which natural selection results in "survival of the
fittest." Social Darwinists base their beliefs on theories of evolution
developed by British naturalist Charles Darwin.
There I would argue with them. Most of the foundation for the idea was
laid by Spencer who published some of his work *before* Darwin. The
social darwinists (and I don't think Spencer used the term, at least not
initially), latched onto Darwin's work, claiming it supported their
position.
Which position seems to actually have a fairly long heritage. The concept
of "races" was largely codified in the 18th century with Caucasians being
put at the top because, so help me, they were supposed to be the best
looking.
(One of the most explosive concepts in our history amounts to a beauty
contest ranking by a single individual)
Some social Darwinists
argue that governments should not interfere with human competition by
attempting to regulate the economy or cure social ills such as poverty.
Instead, they advocate a laissez-faire political and economic system
that favors competition and self-interest in social and business
affairs. Social Darwinists typically deny that they advocate a "law of
the jungle." But most propose arguments that justify imbalances of power
between individuals, races, and nations because they consider some
people more fit to survive than others."
Rich Christians, by the way, lapped it up. It justified their gross
wealth and their neglect of the poor who would, after all, "always be
with us." Survival of the Fittest was God's way of separating the wheat
from the chaff.
I think the whole thing grew out of Christianity. Long before Darwin or
Spencer, people were using that idiotic verse about Ham and whatever to
justify the "positions" of the races.
(Though, ironically enough, if you pay close attention, that verse would
put Asians on top. Apparently "god" favors the least Christian people on
the planet.)
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
“Theology is the effort to explain the unknowable
in terms of the not worth knowing.”
- H. L. Mencken
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits LeadingDarwinistDawkins |
14 Dec 2007 09:46:34 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 02:49:42 -0800, Sound of Trumpet wrote:
http://www.codemonkeyramblings.com/2007/11/
who_would_have_thought_that_ap.php
Who would have thought that applying Darwinism to humanity would lead to
cruelty?
By MikeT on November 2, 2007 12:13 AM
Dawkins admits that his fundamental truth about the world is pretty ugly
when society lives according to it:
As irksome as Richard Dawkins can sometimes be, one must nevertheless
admire his occasional outbursts of honesty. Over at First Things Fr. Ed
Oakes refers to an interview Dawkins gave to an Austrian newspaper, Die
Presse (July 30, 2005), in which he said: "No decent person wants to
live in a society that works according to Darwinian laws... A Darwinian
society would be a fascist state."
And given the dishonest track record of theists and creationists in
handling quotes, we're supposed to believe Dawkins said this why?
All societies work by Darwinian rules. Always have.
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"Oh Log Cabin, full of taste, my stomach is with thee.
Blessed are three among syrups..."
- Homer
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ash" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits Leading DarwinistDawkins |
14 Dec 2007 07:47:02 AM |
|
|
Sound of Trumpet wrote:
http://www.codemonkeyramblings.com/2007/11/who_would_have_thought_that_ap.php
Who would have thought that applying Darwinism to humanity would lead
to cruelty?
By MikeT on November 2, 2007 12:13 AM
Dawkins admits that his fundamental truth about the world is pretty
ugly when society lives according to it:
As irksome as Richard Dawkins can sometimes be, one must nevertheless
admire his occasional outbursts of honesty. Over at First Things Fr.
Ed Oakes refers to an interview Dawkins gave to an Austrian newspaper,
Die Presse (July 30, 2005), in which he said: "No decent person wants
to live in a society that works according to Darwinian laws... A
Darwinian society would be a fascist state."
Which as any intelligent person knows, has nothing to do with the truth
of evolution
Atheists like Dawkins really show with statements like this that they
are a very schizophrenic lot. They believe a fundamental truth that is
cruel and cold toward human life, then suggest that we simply ignore
it (assuming Darwinism be true). This is itself like a form of heresy
when you think about it because it requires an atheist to acknowledge
an unpleasant, but true, fundamental truth of Darwinism, and then
preach against it. Now, when a Christian goes out and espouses the
killing of the poor, he or she is being a heretic. When an atheist
"knows" that Darwin was fundamentally right, but then advocates
fundamental equality between the best of society, and the very worse,
he or she is committing the same sort of act, only in a way that is
less obviously damaging to freedom.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwinian Society World Be A Fascist State, Admits Leading Darwinist Dawkins |
14 Dec 2007 10:15:38 AM |
|
|
Sound of Trumpet wrote:
http://www.codemonkeyramblings.com/2007/11/who_would_have_thought_that_ap.php
Who would have thought that applying Darwinism to humanity would lead
to cruelty?
Lots and lots of people think that.
Google "social darwinism". Or read a book. Or something.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
