S
StAnastasia
Guest
What do you mean? Your question makes no sense.
- Status
T
tjm190
Guest
So you believe the extent of a living entity’s continued propagation is completely independent of it’s ability to survive and reproduce? I believe God either could or does assert active control over the weather- that being said, I still think the weather can be understood as being controlled by ‘natural’ forces.Concur. You are confused.God alone sets up and pulls down, exalts and humiliates, kills and makes alive. God delivers by His Almighty hand and wisdom, not by the brute forces of nature. I provided you one of hundreds of scriptural evidences for His sovreign dominion over nature and especially the grotesque postulations of darwin. Jesus saved the world by dying on a cross. God chooses the foolish things of the world to confound the wise, the weak things to confound the strong, etc… (1 Cor 2).
"darwinize’? How so, and says who?
Many European nations with higher acceptance rates of evolution still have social programs, which serve to usurp survival of the fittest, to an even greater extent than America does.
C
Catholic_Johnny
Guest
What part of “by him all things subsist” and “He upholds all things by His divine power” do you not understand?
Social programs? LOL! So that is the metric for the health of a society? The fact that they kill their offspring, deprive the elderly of health services and have birth rates below 1.5 per couple would indicate that ‘nature is selecting the fittest for survival’ and that they that embrace darwin inherit his curse. Perhaps there is some poetic justice there. God is not mocked; we reap what we sow.
demographicwinter.com/
%between%
B
buffalo
Guest
Excellent link. I recommend everyone look at this.
T
tjm190
Guest
You have chosen to answer my question with a question? Well let me answer your question with a question-“So you believe the extent of a living entity’s continued propagation is completely independent of it’s ability to survive and reproduce?”
You said they ‘darwinized.’ A ‘darwin based’ society would not provide benefits to those who could not keep themselves a live. European societies do. Your claim is false.
C
Catholic_Johnny
Guest
- No one is independent of the Creator, great or small, strong or weak. Exhibit A: Israel.
- darwinized = significant population reduction.
Therefore, societies that embrace darwin become his victims. They lose their connection to God, do not invest in their longterm futures, and have no qualms sacrificing their offspring on the altar of human pleasure (via abortion). Neither are they willing to die for a cause, and will surrender to almost anyone who threatens them.
T
tjm190
Guest
What does a decrease in population have to do with Darwin? And again, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_transition- it’s a well understood phenomena, but I supposed sociology is satan’s work.
C
Catholic_Johnny
Guest
If it’s so well-known, why does the link you provide have only this to say about it?
The reality is that until darwinism took root in the west (and in the communist eastern nations like China and Russia) populations rarely ever declined, especially by their own decisions to limit growth. It may be painful to admit, but the facts are the facts. Darwinists cried ‘the sky is falling!’ with the so-called (and now embarrasingly and tragically wrong) population explosion of the 1970s and advocated limiting growth for the sake of survival (even though at the time, the entire world’s population could fit in Jacksonville, FL with every human being having 10 square feet). What ended up happening is that those populations are now top-heavy with seniors and will go bankrupt without large percentages of immigration influx to sustain their aging work forces.
For us Catholics, the holocaust of slain infants killed to sustain lascivious behaviors (abortion) is the most degrading sign of darwinism’s grip on the population. Nothing could be more pagan and less Christian.
Those that subscribe to any darwinistic doctrines of any proportion will receive darwin’s reward. History will show that evolutionists were ‘deselected by nature for survival’.
Oh, and BTW, any social science based on evolutionary natural science is indeed the work of satan.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
What a great celebration of the power and majesty of “post hoc ergo propter hoc” can be found in this thread.
R
rossum
Guest
Yup. I blame Pius IX, it all started going downhill after he was elected pope in 1846.
rossum
T
tjm190
Guest
Cause I added the - to the end.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_transition
Social scientists with no stake in darwin’s work haven’t found any real connection between growth rates and darwin.
Evolution has nothing to do with over population, but like it or not the Earth’s current population and population growth rate is unsustainable. However, people are not limiting their births because of some feeling of responsibility, they’re doing so because their economic situation changes.
And abortion and darwin are unrelated concepts.
S
StAnastasia
Guest
True. But perhaps there is a connection between abortion and the pointless prohibition of so-called “artificial” birth control? It might be worth exploring.
B
buffalo
Guest
As the Pope said we are living in a “culture of death.” That is consistent with a survival of the fittest worldview.
Show me how the materialist neo-Darwinian worldview would support the “culture of life”.
T
tjm190
Guest
Although it’s not a position I’m a fan of, I’d probably have to say no- I doubt very many people who follow that particular Church teaching (birth control nonproliferation) would see abortion in a positive light.
R
rossum
Guest
So, lets give it a try:
In a “neo-Darwinian worldview” evolution is good. Evolution is driven by variations in a population - the more variations the more scope for evolution. The larger a population the more variations in that population. The more mutations the more variations. Hence we need large populations with large numbers of mutations and lots of genetic diversity to help evolution along.
Abortion reduces populations. Aborting babies with genetic diseases reduces variation in the population. Hitler was anti-Darwinian since he tried to entirely eliminate one genetic strain of variation from the population entirely hence decreasing genetic diversity. Hitler’s “pure Aryan” would be genetically bad because it would not be diverse enough and have problems like the Amish and Cheetahs from lack of genetic diversity. Variation is good; genetic diversity is good; both favour evolution.
How did I do?
rossum
T
tjm190
Guest
Do you deny that in nature it is those best fitted to survive do so? If so, then you support the culture of death by your own logic. If not, then you have a very poor definition of ‘best fitted to survive.’
B
buffalo
Guest
You never disappoint, a deep thinker to be sure.
B
buffalo
Guest
Humans always were able to adapt, so we cannot reduce the human purpose to nature.
The culture of death is the attitude and choices made by humans and their effect on human life.
T
tjm190
Guest
And that has nothing to do with evolution
L
LongJohnSilver
Guest
He did not like his former collegues very much than, because once he was in charge he had most of them killed or send to death camps. We’re talking tens of thousands priests, nuns and monks.
- Status