Darwinism Produces Sociopathic Ideologies
Look at what some evolutionists are saying about the implications of their theory for human society.
Racist genes: Here’s a provocative title from National Geographic: “Are there genes for intelligence, and is it racist to ask?” Racism is surely one of the most divisive social problems in America and many parts of the world. Creationists do not deny differences in IQ, but believe all humans are “created equal” and have intrinsic dignity because they are souls made in God’s image; they are more than their genes. To an evolutionist, all traits are genetic and follow ancestral lineages. In her article on genetic editing and the search for “intelligence genes,” author Robin Henig tiptoes about the implications, not wanting to resuscitate two specters of the past: “the work could support racist notions of biological differences, and that it could make those designer smart babies a reality.”
That’s why scientists are now being called upon to consider whether it’s ethical to study the genetics of intelligence. Researchers should think about “limits we should place or steps we can take to be sure we don’t repeat historical errors,” such as forced sterilization of the “feeble-minded” in the early 20th century, said Mildred Solomon, president of the Hastings Center, a bioethics think tank.
In early December, the Hastings Center gathered a small group of scholars and ethicists in New York City to discuss the future of intelligence research. Earlier in the week, a more international gathering had debated the ethics of editing human genes—and both groups wondered whether some studies could lead so directly to dangerous applications that they shouldn’t even be done in the first place.
Henig forgot to mention that the “historical errors” were committed by evolutionists following Darwin and his half-cousin, Francis Galton, the father of eugenics. Forced sterilizations that followed were direct results of eugenics, as documented by John West in Darwin Day in America. A sequence at the end of Ben Stein’s 2008 documentary Expelled shows a museum curator at the infamous Hadamar prison stating that the ten thousands of murders of mentally retarded that occurred there, including of children, were based on Darwinism.
Evolutionary suicide: Another provocative title is found on Science Daily: “Is suicide a tragic variant of an evolutionarily adaptive set of behaviors?” The implication is that if some animals do it, humans (as just another evolved animal) do it, too, because of evolution. The article considers the opinions of an evolutionary psychologist who offers “a framework in which suicide is viewed as a tragic variant of what typically serves as an adaptive tendency towards self-sacrifice among humans.” The word adaptive is code for what natural selection produces by blind, unguided evolutionary processes.
Evolutionary free ride: Another paper on the “evolution of cooperation” has appeared in PNAS. It offers a new twist on the assumptions going into evolutionary game theory, but it still sees cooperators and selfish free-riders as products of natural forces. If free-riding is just an adaptation, it’s not really wrong.
The mind in the brain: One of the most serious divides between theists and materialists concerns mind-body dualism. Most readers will remember the heart-wrenching case of Terry Schiavo, considered to be in a “persistent vegetative state” (PVS) and therefore not really a person deserving full rights. Consequently, judges allowed her to be starved to death by removal of her feeding tube against the earnest pleas of her parents, to fulfill her husband’s wish. New experiments will send shivers up the spine of those considering Terry’s possible unspoken anguish during her final painful days. New Scientist offers evidence that some people classified as PVS can work out math problems in their head. “Maths helps ‘locked-in’ pair show awareness for first time,” Helen Thomson reports. Patients were shown a math problem while brain activity was monitored.
Two of six participants diagnosed as being in a vegetative state, one of three people in a minimally conscious state and two people who had recently emerged from a minimally conscious state were able to correctly communicate their answers to the sums with accuracies that could not have occurred by chance.
If Schiavo and others let die because of PVS had been tested with this method, would the judges have ruled differently?
Biblical creation is the only worldview that supplies dignity to the individual and true morality to society. Abandon it for amoral evolution at your own risk. See the Moral Argument for God in a short video by William Lane Craig on YouTube.
Good article, David. Lifesitenews.com frequently publishes news about people who have been considered ‘brain dead’ but who subsequently recovered. Here is the title of one published on April 25, 2012: “Dad rescues ‘brain dead’ son from doctors wishing to harvest his organs – boy recovers completely”. There are many others. PS: I enjoyed your recent articles on “Footprints”.