Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
There is no way that all of them can be listed in such a short space. Here is just a few for you:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
TX Lt. Gov. Blames El Paso Shooting on Not Letting Kids “Pray in Our Schools”
- Thread starter Skwim
- Start date
tas8831
Well-Known Member
Well, you are clearly OK with Christianity-based racism, so...
Black and women are inferior to Caucasian males, as Mr. Darwin insisted!
Why do you continue to lie about this?
Tell us all about how your Jehovah places women on equal footing and how he told you to love foreigners.
Yes, I saw your 'conference' link - nothing to do with science.
And every time you engage in these dopey fallacy posts, I will remind all about you hysterical own goal with the Darwin-Hitler thing, and how you stupidly put your eggs in the Weikart basket because your righty-religious cult masters told you to, and also how the father of modern YECism used Scripture to justify the right-wing race hatred:
But I have to agree - Darwinism is gross - look what it produces:
"The descendants of Ham were marked especially for secular service to mankind. Indeed they were to be 'servants of servants,' that is 'servants extraordinary!' Although only Canaan is mentioned specifically (possibly because the branch of Ham's family through Canaan would later come into most direct contact with Israel), the whole family of Ham is in view. The prophecy is worldwide in scope and, since Shem and Japheth are covered, all Ham's descendants must be also. These include all nations which are neither Semitic nor Japhetic. Thus, all of the earth's 'colored' races,--yellow, red, brown, and black--essentially the Afro-Asian group of peoples, including the American Indians--are possibly Hamitic in origin and included within the scope of the Canaanitic prophecy, as well as the Egyptians, Sumerians, Hittites, and Phoenicians of antiquity.
...Yet the prophecy again has its obverse side. Somehow they have only gone so far and no farther. The Japhethites and Semites have, sooner or later, taken over their territories, and their inventions, and then developed them and utilized them for their own enlargement. Often the Hamites, especially the Negroes, have become actual personal servants or even slaves to the others. Possessed of a genetic character concerned mainly with mundane matters, they have eventually been displaced by the intellectual and philosophical acumen of the Japhethites and the religious zeal of the Semites.
...Yet the prophecy again has its obverse side. Somehow they have only gone so far and no farther. The Japhethites and Semites have, sooner or later, taken over their territories, and their inventions, and then developed them and utilized them for their own enlargement. Often the Hamites, especially the Negroes, have become actual personal servants or even slaves to the others. Possessed of a genetic character concerned mainly with mundane matters, they have eventually been displaced by the intellectual and philosophical acumen of the Japhethites and the religious zeal of the Semites.
Such gross racism from Darwinism!
Oh, wait - that is not 'Darwinism' - that is Scripture based racism from Henry Morris, the father of the modern Creationism movement!
in 1991!!!
Dr. Henry Morris, YEC
The Beginning Of the World, Second Edition (1991), pp. 147-148
The Beginning Of the World, Second Edition (1991), pp. 147-148
And let us not forget that our friend and resident language scholar @BilliardsBall was kind enough to link to a paper examining the link between Darwin and Hitler that concluded:
"In order to sustain the thesis that Hitler was a Darwinian one would have to ignore all the explicit statements of Hitler rejecting any theory like Darwin’s and draw fanciful implications from vague words, errant phrases, and ambiguous sentences,neglecting altogether more straight -forward, contextual interpretations of such utterances. Only the ideologically blinded would still try to sustain the thesis in the face of the contrary, manifest evidence."
@BilliardsBall also foisted upon us the crazy ranting of Richard Weikart - probably to contrast his lies and nonsense with the work of Robert Richards quoted above. Here is how Weikart's religious pap was received by actual non-right wing religious nut scholars:
Negative evaluations by academic reviewers are critical of the book citing Weikart's selective use of primary sources and ignoring a range of developments that shaped Nazi ideology.[4] In 2004, Sander Gliboff, professor of History and Philosophy of Science at Indiana University, criticized the work writing that "It is dismaying to see such opinions being passed off as results of scholarly research."[16] In 2005, Andrew Zimmerman, a professor of German history, reviewed it in the American Historical Review, writing "Weikart presents an image of Darwinism at once both too narrow and too broad."[17] Zimmerman wrote:
Also in 2005, science historian Paul Lawrence Farber wrote in the Journal of the History of Biology that "Like other attempts to tar Darwin with all of the problems of modernity, Weikart's suffers from conceptual flaws that detract from his book, which contains some interesting material on the German eugenics movement, popular Darwinism in Germany, and German evolutionary ethics."[25] He concluded "Weikart's book, unfortunately, is likely to spawn more urban myths about Darwin that will have to be addressed."[25]
In 2006, Robert J. Richards, historian of Darwin and eugenics at University of Chicago, wrote "It can only be a tendentious and dogmatically driven assessment that would condemn Darwin for the crimes of the Nazis."[26] Richards more pointedly concluded "Hitler was not a Darwinian" and "calls this all a desperate tactic to undermine evolution."[27] Richards explained, "There's not the slightest shred of evidence that Hitler read Darwin," and "Some of the biggest influences on Hitler's anti-Semitism were opposed to evolution, such as British writer Houston Stewart Chamberlain, whose racial theory became incorporated into Nazi doctrine."[27]...
So - thanks BB for demolishing your OWN claims yet again!The German Darwinians who are the focus of the book appear only as advocates of eugenics, racism, and imperialism, although presumably these policies were informed by a broader intellectual project. At the same time, German anthropologists, who opposed Darwinism before the turn of the century (as a doctrine possessing no more empirical foundation than revealed religion does), are lumped with Darwinists, since these anthropologists also supported imperialism and racist hierarchies.[17]
Weikart replied to Zimmerman's criticism with a letter to the editor[18] to which Zimmerman offered a rebuttal saying Weikart's work "is anachronistic, projecting present‐day theocratic agendas onto the history of science in Imperial Germany."[19]...
Also in 2005, science historian Paul Lawrence Farber wrote in the Journal of the History of Biology that "Like other attempts to tar Darwin with all of the problems of modernity, Weikart's suffers from conceptual flaws that detract from his book, which contains some interesting material on the German eugenics movement, popular Darwinism in Germany, and German evolutionary ethics."[25] He concluded "Weikart's book, unfortunately, is likely to spawn more urban myths about Darwin that will have to be addressed."[25]
In 2006, Robert J. Richards, historian of Darwin and eugenics at University of Chicago, wrote "It can only be a tendentious and dogmatically driven assessment that would condemn Darwin for the crimes of the Nazis."[26] Richards more pointedly concluded "Hitler was not a Darwinian" and "calls this all a desperate tactic to undermine evolution."[27] Richards explained, "There's not the slightest shred of evidence that Hitler read Darwin," and "Some of the biggest influences on Hitler's anti-Semitism were opposed to evolution, such as British writer Houston Stewart Chamberlain, whose racial theory became incorporated into Nazi doctrine."[27]...
Brilliant work!
tas8831
Well-Known Member
And he never did...
Sand Dancer
Currently catless
As time goes on and the current crop of elderly pass and as Christianity continues to decline, most states will be blue eventually.
tas8831
Well-Known Member
Hello? BilliardsBall the bible expert?
tas8831
Well-Known Member
Milton Platt
Well-Known Member
My schools were not listed. But this is an interesting list, though. Thanks.