Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
but the ideology has also motivated ideas of eugenics, scientific racism, imperialism,[4] fascism, Nazism and struggle between national or racial groups.[5][6]
Opponents of evolution theory have often maintained that social Darwinism is a logical entailment of a belief in evolutionary theory, while biologists and historians maintain that it is rather a perversion of Charles Darwin's ideas.
Eugenics:
Today it is widely regarded as a brutal movement which inflicted massive human rights violations on millions of people.[15] The "interventions" advocated and practiced by eugenicists involved prominently the identification and classification of individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, developmentally disabled, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups such as the Roma and Jews as "degenerate" or "unfit"; the segregation or institutionalisation of such individuals and groups, their sterilization, euthanasia, and in the extreme case of Nazi Germany, their mass extermination.[16]
The modern field and term were first formulated by Sir Francis Galton in 1883,[18] drawing on the recent work of his half-cousin Charles Darwin.[19][20] At its peak of popularity eugenics was supported by a wide variety of prominent people, including Winston Churchill,[21] Margaret Sanger,[22][23] Marie Stopes, H. G. Wells, Theodore Roosevelt, George Bernard Shaw, John Maynard Keynes, John Harvey Kellogg, Linus Pauling[24] and Sidney Webb.[25][26][27] Many members of the American Progressive Movement supported eugenics, seduced by its scientific trappings and its promise of a quick end to social ills. Its most infamous proponent and practitioner was, however, Adolf Hitler who praised and incorporated eugenic ideas in Mein Kampf and emulated Eugenic legislation for the sterilization of "defectives" that had been pioneered in the United States.[28
Yeah it does, the left was huge and still is in eugenics. and so were Nazis, hey how about that. Margaret Sanger and hitler...OMG....who would have known?
And not many right wing christians in the social darwinsim movement but lots and lots of progressives, sorry man. Nice try though.
The "interventions" advocated and practiced by eugenicists involved prominently the identification and classification of individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, developmentally disabled, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups.
Name ONE current 'leftist' who professes eugenics? Just ONE will do. Ironic, those are all groups the left defends against right wing social Darwinist policy interventions, like drug testing people on unemployment and welfare, cutting vital social programs, gay bashing and anti- same sex marriage. Control of a woman's uterus.
You right wingers LOVE government intervention when it can crush the poor, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups.
Hey dumbass, progressive used to kill homos, in the name of eugnics, and black people, ect. Notice Roosevelt ("progressive republican") is on there but Taft ("convservative republican") is not. Christians dont believe in eugenics.
And stopping abortion has zero to do with eugenics, even Margaret Sanger said it was horrible, THINK About that, she supported eugenics but NOT abortion. OWNED!!!!!!!!
Todays believers:
After-Birth Abortion: The pro-choice case for infanticide. - Slate Magazine
Again going back to government policies, welfare is not even in this dicussion, I mean people who get government handouts because they're poor shouldnt be buying drugs, do you disagree with that? really?
but when you got nothing come up with something I guess.
I love it when a post comes together! Hanibal Smith!
Hitler, like all CON$ervoFascists, was a NATIONALIST, a NATIONAL Socialist. Hitler believed in German Exceptionalism just like today's CON$ervoFascists believe in American Exceptionalism. CON$ervoFascists and Nazis are twin sisters.It seems some right-wingers on this thread do not believe conservatives or liberals have the characteristics that are known to be conservative or liberal, so they ignore or change the characeristics to fit their concepts.
Ideologies and history become a sort of wonderland, with Hitler becoming a socialist; fascism becoming nothing but large groups of labor unions; the SS a bunch of school teachers waiting to go on strike, and Gulags become government entitlement programs.
Hitler was a Socialist- A National Socialist. The narrative that causes so much confusion is the one that attempts to link Hitler's Nazism to American conservatism- They are not even distant cousins.
The "interventions" advocated and practiced by eugenicists involved prominently the identification and classification of individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, developmentally disabled, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups.
Name ONE current 'leftist' who professes eugenics? Just ONE will do. Ironic, those are all groups the left defends against right wing social Darwinist policy interventions, like drug testing people on unemployment and welfare, cutting vital social programs, gay bashing and anti- same sex marriage. Control of a woman's uterus.
You right wingers LOVE government intervention when it can crush the poor, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups.
Hey dumbass, progressive used to kill homos, in the name of eugnics, and black people, ect. Notice Roosevelt ("progressive republican") is on there but Taft ("convservative republican") is not. Christians dont believe in eugenics.
And stopping abortion has zero to do with eugenics, even Margaret Sanger said it was horrible, THINK About that, she supported eugenics but NOT abortion. OWNED!!!!!!!!
Todays believers:
After-Birth Abortion: The pro-choice case for infanticide. - Slate Magazine
Again going back to government policies, welfare is not even in this dicussion, I mean people who get government handouts because they're poor shouldnt be buying drugs, do you disagree with that? really?
but when you got nothing come up with something I guess.
I love it when a post comes together! Hanibal Smith!
If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands.
Douglas Adams
I have been around since Truman was in the White House. In all my years as a citizen I have NEVER heard one single liberal promote anything that even resembles eugenics or the concepts behind eugenics. 'The "interventions" advocated and practiced by eugenicists involved prominently the identification and classification of individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, developmentally disabled, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups'
Yet, this board is infested with right wingers professing their social Darwinism on a daily basis and the concepts and mindset REQUIRED to consider something as radical as eugenics. 'The "interventions" advocated and practiced by eugenicists involved prominently the identification and classification of individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, developmentally disabled, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups'.
Those are all groups liberals defend as having equal rights and liberals defend their protection, while conservatives would willingly identify and classify those people as 'others' dismissing them as being deserving of some form of exclusion, sanction or punishment.
Nope, he meant what he said. Extreme nationalism is a trait of right wing extremism.You are aware that being 'wrapped in the flag' and 'carrying the cross etc.' are the flags, slogans, and emblems representing the would be facist regime and not the nationalist emblems? That facism requires tearing down all existing loyalties so that the new regime can be installed? One of the tactics to install facism is to make nationalist displays such as flag waving and patriotic symbolism and existing cherished institutions appear to be flawed and symptomatic of all that is wrong that facism will correct.
also a trait of the right is small govt, which is NOT fascism
The "interventions" advocated and practiced by eugenicists involved prominently the identification and classification of individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, developmentally disabled, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups.
Name ONE current 'leftist' who professes eugenics? Just ONE will do. Ironic, those are all groups the left defends against right wing social Darwinist policy interventions, like drug testing people on unemployment and welfare, cutting vital social programs, gay bashing and anti- same sex marriage. Control of a woman's uterus.
You right wingers LOVE government intervention when it can crush the poor, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups.
Hey dumbass, progressive used to kill homos, in the name of eugnics, and black people, ect. Notice Roosevelt ("progressive republican") is on there but Taft ("convservative republican") is not. Christians dont believe in eugenics.
And stopping abortion has zero to do with eugenics, even Margaret Sanger said it was horrible, THINK About that, she supported eugenics but NOT abortion. OWNED!!!!!!!!
Todays believers:
After-Birth Abortion: The pro-choice case for infanticide. - Slate Magazine
Again going back to government policies, welfare is not even in this dicussion, I mean people who get government handouts because they're poor shouldnt be buying drugs, do you disagree with that? really?
but when you got nothing come up with something I guess.
I love it when a post comes together! Hanibal Smith!
just gonna repost for bfgrn, owned, now I see you're saying right wing progressives, hahaha, I guess kicking ass and showing Hitler and the rest of his "pregressive" brethern do all the social darwinism you accuse of the right. AWESOME!
Hey dumbass, progressive used to kill homos, in the name of eugnics, and black people, ect. Notice Roosevelt ("progressive republican") is on there but Taft ("convservative republican") is not. Christians dont believe in eugenics.
And stopping abortion has zero to do with eugenics, even Margaret Sanger said it was horrible, THINK About that, she supported eugenics but NOT abortion. OWNED!!!!!!!!
Todays believers:
After-Birth Abortion: The pro-choice case for infanticide. - Slate Magazine
Again going back to government policies, welfare is not even in this dicussion, I mean people who get government handouts because they're poor shouldnt be buying drugs, do you disagree with that? really?
but when you got nothing come up with something I guess.
I love it when a post comes together! Hanibal Smith!
If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands.
Douglas Adams
I have been around since Truman was in the White House. In all my years as a citizen I have NEVER heard one single liberal promote anything that even resembles eugenics or the concepts behind eugenics. 'The "interventions" advocated and practiced by eugenicists involved prominently the identification and classification of individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, developmentally disabled, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups'
Yet, this board is infested with right wingers professing their social Darwinism on a daily basis and the concepts and mindset REQUIRED to consider something as radical as eugenics. 'The "interventions" advocated and practiced by eugenicists involved prominently the identification and classification of individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, developmentally disabled, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups'.
Those are all groups liberals defend as having equal rights and liberals defend their protection, while conservatives would willingly identify and classify those people as 'others' dismissing them as being deserving of some form of exclusion, sanction or punishment.
MAn I just gave you an article from left wingers about after birth abortion, and I proved that ALL the major progressives were for eugenics, as well as Stalin, Hitler, Mao. Now you and you left wing buddies are claiming right wing progressivism, since I've proved how horrible they are and how you project social darwinsm to christian republicans, again I dont know of any that support eugenics or any of it's theories, can you find me some?
Owning you left wingers is so much fun, yeah I have to get evidence, but I do, you dont, sucks to support the side that supports eugenics and Mengela type medicine (death panels, after birth abortion, partial birth abortion, hell abortion at all, Again Sanger supported eugenics but thought Abortion was worse and didnt want to touch it. That shows you just how wrong you are.)
If you've been around for that long and not known it, then you need to wake up Rip Van Winkle.
Hey dumbass, progressive used to kill homos, in the name of eugnics, and black people, ect. Notice Roosevelt ("progressive republican") is on there but Taft ("convservative republican") is not. Christians dont believe in eugenics.
And stopping abortion has zero to do with eugenics, even Margaret Sanger said it was horrible, THINK About that, she supported eugenics but NOT abortion. OWNED!!!!!!!!
Todays believers:
After-Birth Abortion: The pro-choice case for infanticide. - Slate Magazine
Again going back to government policies, welfare is not even in this dicussion, I mean people who get government handouts because they're poor shouldnt be buying drugs, do you disagree with that? really?
but when you got nothing come up with something I guess.
I love it when a post comes together! Hanibal Smith!
If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands.
Douglas Adams
I have been around since Truman was in the White House. In all my years as a citizen I have NEVER heard one single liberal promote anything that even resembles eugenics or the concepts behind eugenics. 'The "interventions" advocated and practiced by eugenicists involved prominently the identification and classification of individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, developmentally disabled, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups'
Yet, this board is infested with right wingers professing their social Darwinism on a daily basis and the concepts and mindset REQUIRED to consider something as radical as eugenics. 'The "interventions" advocated and practiced by eugenicists involved prominently the identification and classification of individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, developmentally disabled, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups'.
Those are all groups liberals defend as having equal rights and liberals defend their protection, while conservatives would willingly identify and classify those people as 'others' dismissing them as being deserving of some form of exclusion, sanction or punishment.
MAn I just gave you an article from left wingers about after birth abortion, and I proved that ALL the major progressives were for eugenics, as well as Stalin, Hitler, Mao. Now you and you left wing buddies are claiming right wing progressivism, since I've proved how horrible they are and how you project social darwinsm to christian republicans, again I dont know of any that support eugenics or any of it's theories, can you find me some?
Owning you left wingers is so much fun, yeah I have to get evidence, but I do, you dont, sucks to support the side that supports eugenics and Mengela type medicine (death panels, after birth abortion, partial birth abortion, hell abortion at all, Again Sanger supported eugenics but thought Abortion was worse and didnt want to touch it. That shows you just how wrong you are.)
If you've been around for that long and not known it, then you need to wake up Rip Van Winkle.
Progressivism has right wing as well as left wing forms, Foxfyre. Santorum fits your description quite well. He would have expanded government power to eliminate all abortion, for example, except in danger of life to mother, and there is question on how much he would have supported even that limitation.
So...Romney is lying to get elected, and I should just trust him? Romney is saying let's do exactly what we did under the Bush administration and this time hope for different results. It seems for you Romney IS Christ.
Romney is being a politician in a very corrupt time in the history of our Republic, and our GOP has a very corrupt far right. Get over it.
OK, then WHY validate our GOP's very corrupt far right? It makes NO sense at all. The 'solutions' Romney and the GOP offer will plunge this nation into a deep recession.
Romney has flipped flopped more than any 'politician' in this very corrupt time in the history of our Republic. He has no spine, he is a panderer.
So, I guess you believe in austerity and blood letting.
Progressivism has right wing as well as left wing forms, Foxfyre. Santorum fits your description quite well. He would have expanded government power to eliminate all abortion, for example, except in danger of life to mother, and there is question on how much he would have supported even that limitation.
Actually no there are progressives in both parties yet there is no conservative progressive....Conservatives believe in freedom and liberty where progressives do not.
Romney is being a politician in a very corrupt time in the history of our Republic, and our GOP has a very corrupt far right. Get over it.
OK, then WHY validate our GOP's very corrupt far right? It makes NO sense at all. The 'solutions' Romney and the GOP offer will plunge this nation into a deep recession.
Romney has flipped flopped more than any 'politician' in this very corrupt time in the history of our Republic. He has no spine, he is a panderer.
So, I guess you believe in austerity and blood letting.
Point to anything i have said that validates the corrupt far right, or the corrupt far left, for that matter.
If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands.
Douglas Adams
I have been around since Truman was in the White House. In all my years as a citizen I have NEVER heard one single liberal promote anything that even resembles eugenics or the concepts behind eugenics. 'The "interventions" advocated and practiced by eugenicists involved prominently the identification and classification of individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, developmentally disabled, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups'
Yet, this board is infested with right wingers professing their social Darwinism on a daily basis and the concepts and mindset REQUIRED to consider something as radical as eugenics. 'The "interventions" advocated and practiced by eugenicists involved prominently the identification and classification of individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, developmentally disabled, promiscuous women, homosexuals and entire racial groups'.
Those are all groups liberals defend as having equal rights and liberals defend their protection, while conservatives would willingly identify and classify those people as 'others' dismissing them as being deserving of some form of exclusion, sanction or punishment.
MAn I just gave you an article from left wingers about after birth abortion, and I proved that ALL the major progressives were for eugenics, as well as Stalin, Hitler, Mao. Now you and you left wing buddies are claiming right wing progressivism, since I've proved how horrible they are and how you project social darwinsm to christian republicans, again I dont know of any that support eugenics or any of it's theories, can you find me some?
Owning you left wingers is so much fun, yeah I have to get evidence, but I do, you dont, sucks to support the side that supports eugenics and Mengela type medicine (death panels, after birth abortion, partial birth abortion, hell abortion at all, Again Sanger supported eugenics but thought Abortion was worse and didnt want to touch it. That shows you just how wrong you are.)
If you've been around for that long and not known it, then you need to wake up Rip Van Winkle.
You don't even know what you posted, but it met your low intelligence criteria as 'ammo'.
Here is a letter from Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva, the two Australian bioethicists you ASSume are liberals, based on...???
An open letter from Giubilini and Minerva
Excerpts:
It was meant to be a pure exercise of logic: if X, then Y. We expected that other bioethicists would challenge either the premise or the logical pattern we followed, because this is what happens in academic debates. And we believed we were going to read interesting responses to the argument, as we already read a few on this topic in religious websites.
However, we never meant to suggest that after-birth abortion should become legal. This was not made clear enough in the paper. Laws are not just about rational ethical arguments, because there are many practical, emotional, social aspects that are relevant in policy making (such as respecting the plurality of ethical views, peoples emotional reactions etc). But we are not policy makers, we are philosophers, and we deal with concepts, not with legal policy.
Moreover, we did not suggest that after birth abortion should be permissible for months or years as the media erroneously reported.
We are really sorry that many people, who do not share the background of the intended audience for this article, felt offended, outraged, or even threatened. We apologise to them, but we could not control how the message was promulgated across the internet and then conveyed by the media. In fact, we personally do not agree with much of what the media suggest we think. Because of these misleading messages pumped by certain groups on the internet and picked up for a controversy-hungry media, we started to receive many emails from very angry people (most of whom claimed to be Pro-Life and very religious) who threatened to kill us or which were extremely abusive. Prof Savulescu said these responses were out of place, and he himself was attacked because, after all, we deserve it.
We do not think anyone should be abused for writing an academic paper on a controversial topic.
buckeye is putting on a clown show, but very poorly.
Give solid, reputable evidence and sources and I will be glad to reason and guide you, buckeyes.
Nope, he meant what he said. Extreme nationalism is a trait of right wing extremism.
also a trait of the right is small govt, which is NOT fascism
WHEN has the right ever given us small govt? I didn't hear a PEEP from the right calling for small govt or less govt when Bush was in office.
"O con noi o contro di noi"--You're either with us or against us.
Benito Mussolini
"It is with absolute frankness that we speak of this struggle of the proletariat; each man must choose between joining our side or the other side. Any attempt to avoid taking sides in this issue must end in fiasco."
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
"Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."
George W. Bush
buckeye is putting on a clown show, but very poorly.
Give solid, reputable evidence and sources and I will be glad to reason and guide you, buckeyes.
Sorry JAke, you've given nothing, I've proved all your assertions wrong, but hey keep saying Marxism isnt the foundation for the left as well as the other bs you've said.
Progressivism has right wing as well as left wing forms, Foxfyre. Santorum fits your description quite well. He would have expanded government power to eliminate all abortion, for example, except in danger of life to mother, and there is question on how much he would have supported even that limitation.
Goddamit, it has taken me three years to educate you and I see that you have finally learned.
.
Hey dumbass, progressive used to kill homos, in the name of eugnics, and black people, ect. Notice Roosevelt ("progressive republican") is on there but Taft ("convservative republican") is not. Christians dont believe in eugenics.
And stopping abortion has zero to do with eugenics, even Margaret Sanger said it was horrible, THINK About that, she supported eugenics but NOT abortion. OWNED!!!!!!!!
Todays believers:
After-Birth Abortion: The pro-choice case for infanticide. - Slate Magazine
Again going back to government policies, welfare is not even in this dicussion, I mean people who get government handouts because they're poor shouldnt be buying drugs, do you disagree with that? really?
but when you got nothing come up with something I guess.
I love it when a post comes together! Hanibal Smith!
just gonna repost for bfgrn, owned, now I see you're saying right wing progressives, hahaha, I guess kicking ass and showing Hitler and the rest of his "pregressive" brethern do all the social darwinism you accuse of the right. AWESOME!
SHOW me where is said 'right wing progressives'? You really need to pay attention.
