Should Darwin Have Been Pro-Life?

Charles Darwin should have been pro-life. His theory, in my opinion, demands it. Unfortunately, he wasn’t. He encouraged exterminating Australian aboriginals, enslaving Africans, and sterilizing those he viewed as unfit to propagate humanity.

But by not being pro-life, he would have contradicted his own theory. It might be said that he used his own theory to push his own agenda.

Evolution Depends on Natural Processes

Evolution, by definition, happened without intelligent influences or direction. It happened entirely on its own via natural processes.

However, in practice, Darwin and his followers have constantly rejected this idea belief. They believe it is their right to direct the process of evolution through a “science” called Eugenics. Eugenics, in a nutshell, is removing the unfit from society and encouraging the reproduction of the fit. Who is fit and who is unfit? That’s what the evolutionists get to decide.

Evolution Depends on Procreation

At the very heart of evolution is birth.

Evolution depends on genetic mutation. The mutation must then be passed on and distributed throughout a very large population of species. If it isn’t passed throughout the species, then that mutation is at risk of dying off and disappearing into extinction. Then evolution will have to wait for the next mutation.

But to distribute a mutation, then the one with the mutation must be born to be able to distribute it, right?

Killing off babies before birth actually inhibits evolution. It doesn’t allow the human race to evolve and improve. Pro-choice evolutionists are a contradiction. You simply cannot support evolution when you deny humanity from evolving.

Darwin and Down Syndrome

Also at the heart of evolution is the idea that genetic mutation occurs from additional information. So the individual must have more DNA than the rest of its kind. If information was never added, then the species wouldn’t be evolving, it would just be changing.

According to evolutionary theory, some of these mutations might seem harmful at first, but in the long run, they turn out to be extremely beneficial.

For instance, when a reptile started to mutate into a bird, it didn’t have reptilian scales or fully formed feathers, but it had something in between. It was at an extreme disadvantage. It didn’t have the protection because of the strong scales, and it also couldn’t fly away if chased by a predator. As it seems, it was doomed.

But when it comes to individuals with Downs Syndrome, why do evolutionists want to kill them off? Who are we to decide what’s going to be beneficial over billions of years and what’s not? Evolution demands that nature takes its natural course.

We call Downs Syndrome a deformity, not evolution. We call it a problem that’s caused by additional genetic material, not evidence of evolution. And what do we do with them?

We take a test during pregnancy then kill them before they’re even born.

But that contradicts the evolutionary theory. Evolutionary theory demands that we protect the life of these people. Evolutionary theory demands that we admit that we are not the most evolved species ever. Evolutionists will occasionally claim that life on Earth began when a very advanced species of unknown origin planted an evolutionary seed here. But how are we ever supposed to evolve into a more advanced species if we kill off everything that we don’t understand?

Furthermore, Downs Syndrome people have what everyone else craves: happiness. According to a study, people with Downs Syndrome are the happiest people on Earth (www.desiringgod.org/articles/the-happiest-people-in-the-world).

So they have additional information and they have what humanity has been searching for since the beginning of time.

So why are they labeled “Kill on Sight” instead of “Evidential Proof”?

Because they’re considered “unfit.”

Evolutionists are Guilty of Speciesism

What is speciesism? Merriam-Webster defines it as “the assumption of human superiority.”

By not being pro-life, by not protecting people with Down Syndrome and other “deformities,” evolutionists are guilty of a bigoted, hateful, species-superiority complex. They claim superiority by killing off any “evidence” of evolution, but then try to teach others that it’s a natural process that can’t be stopped.

But they’re doing all they can to stop the process which they promote!

As it is right now, humans are the superior and most evolved species on the planet. And they want to keep it that way. If Downs Syndrome individuals were the next step in the evolutionary process, then they pose a threat.

Evolutionists and Aliens

Evolutionists sometimes wonder if life were planted on Earth by a highly evolved and highly intelligent species. We don’t want there to be a god, but we have no problem with aliens. That’s because deep down, we don’t really believe that they do exist.

We may be fascinated with them, even obsessed with them. But if aliens did exist, we would deeply terrified of them. That’s because their existence poses a threat to ours. If they exist, then we aren’t the greatest thing since sliced bread. We aren’t the best. We aren’t ultimately superior. We will be subject to something else, to someone else.

That’s why humans must subdue anything that poses as evidence for evolution. To maintain the disguise that we are the greatest, we must not admit that we aren’t and we must destroy anything that might prove us wrong.

Evolutionists Don’t Support Evolution – They Support Themselves

The reason that evolutionists support abortion and they support the murder of people with “deformities” is really because they don’t care about evolution at all. Evolution is a convenience, not a fact.

Evolution is about justifying their hatred toward God. People don’t want God to exist, and evolution is used as the excuse to say that He doesn’t exist. With no God, there’s no morality. With no morality, then we are left to our own judgment of distinguishing right and wrong. Evolution is just the scapegoat for a much deeper problem.

If evolution was indeed true, if it was an undeniable, irrefutable fact, abortion wouldn’t exist. Abortion would have been criminalized and the punishment would be harsh. What crime could be worse than stopping the evolutionary process that has taken billions of years to get to this point? What could be worse than stopping humans from becoming something super-human?

Evolution and abortion by themselves are contradictory. They cannot logically exist together.

But humans want abortion. They don’t want abortion to be wrong. They don’t want to have to answer to a higher being. They want to be the higher being.

So they put themselves in God’s place. And when we lift ourselves into gods, then we defy anyone to tell us that we’re wrong.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: