There’s so much risible, downright fallacious crap in Matthew’s latest post that it’s difficult to know where to start, but let’s just take one assertion to begin with:
The movie also did deal with the Hitler-Darwin connection, admitting that not every Darwinist will become a Nazi, but suggesting that Darwinism does lend itself nicely to eugenics and the bloodbath that has been many atheistic regimes throughout the 20th century (see current news on China for more details…). Could the Darwinists counter this claim? I don’t know, but that’s only because they haven’t seriously tried yet except to collectively say “nuh-uh”
Complete and utter bullshit. This issue has been addressed by atheists (pretty much all of whom are “Darwinists”) countless times. In fact, Christopher Hitchens devotes an entire chapter of his book God is not Great to this spurious claim: “An Objection Anticipated: The Last-Ditch ‘Case’ Against Secularism.” So, quite simply put, Matthew has proven, once again, that he’s not only profoundly retarded, but is also a big, fat LIAR. Oh, and by the way, Hitler was Christian and claimed in Mein Kampf that what he was doing, he was doing for God.
Old Canard Update: And another thing... I should have stated this in the original post, but the “Darwinism” that Matthew is suggesting as “lend[ing] itself nicely to eugenics and the bloodbath that has been many atheistic regimes throughout the 20th century” is actually “Social Darwinism” that has nothing to do with Darwin’s theory of evolution. In fact, that term only came into vogue in 1944 by the American historian Richard Hofstadter. The notion of eugenics and similar theories predate Darwin’s publication of On the Origin of Species and is more closely related to the ideas of the 18th century clergyman Thomas Malthus, Francis Galton and others.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Posted by Red Tory at 1:20 PM