Expelled from Expelled

I’ve blogged a couple times over the past 6 months (here and here) about the movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, to be released April 18. View the 7:30 “super trailer” if your interest is picqued by this shorter one:

The premise of Expelled? CNS News, today:

Expelled calls attention to the plight of highly credentialed scholars who have been forced out of prestigious academic positions because they proposed Intelligent Design as a possible alternative to Charles Darwin’s 150-year-old theories about the origins of life .
Instead of entertaining a debate on the merits of competing theories, the scientific establishment has moved to suppress the ID movement in a “systematic and ruthless” way at odds with America’s founding principles, the film asserts.

Liberals have been going ape about Expelled for months. On March 20, two Darwinian defenders, who were paid to be interviewed for the film but came out looking like buffoons, tried to bust into a private screening in MN….


pz.jpg“PZ” Myers, a U of MN biology professor and proprietor of the popular atheist blog Pharyngula, was quickly expelled, much as he condones expelling professors who deviate from the monkey line, as he wrote on The Panda’s Thumb blog:

The only appropriate responses [to Intelligent Design proponents] should involve some form of righteous fury, much butt-kicking, and the public firing and humiliation of some teachers, many school board members, and vast numbers of sleazy far-right politicians.” ~ Comment #35130, posted by PZ Myers, 6/14/05, 07:50

richard.jpgRichard Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist at Oxford who wrote the book, The God Delusion, gained entry by signing in with his formal surname, Clinton.
It just so happened an atheist convention was opening the next day in Minneapolis, so several other atheists in town also attempted to crash the party but were likewise expelled.
Then, according to CNS, Myers attempted to disrupt an Expelled conference call with reporters the next day.
These spectacles caused a liberal big bang. On March 24 the Expelled controversy held the number 1 slot in the blogosphere all day, as registered by Nielson’s BlogPulse, and it garnered over 800 Technorati results, all this according to an Expelled press release.
expelled.jpgI spoke with Expelled’s pr rep today and learned Expelled is already making a difference on an interesting front. On March 12 Ben Stein screened the movie for FL legislators in Tallahassee as they geared up to present a bill supporting academic freedom. It looks like it will pass.
Tonight Stein will screen Expelled to MO legislators who have 3 academic freedom bills germinating.
Tomorrow Stein and legislators will hold a press conference spotlighting the pieces of legislation, one of which is the Emily Brooker Higher Education Sunshine Act. In 2006 Brooker sued MSU for violating her free speech and religious rights. MSU settled out-of-court.
In Expelled, atheism and evolution are shown to be chained together with no missing link. These tie to the abortion issue by equating humans as mere highly developed animals, certainly not created in the image of God.
Can’t wait to see Expelled. I think we’ve only just begun to hear the primates scream.
[Myers photo courtesy of Wikipedia; Dawkins photo courtesy of NNDB.com]

335 thoughts on “Expelled from Expelled”

  1. Did you know that Darwinian theories were used by Hitler to justify the Holocaust?
    Scary stuff.

  2. Elizabeth, not too terribly long ago, you advised me to get a clue. I will now do you the courtesy of advising you to do the same.

  3. Why, Hiero?
    I’m just sharing an interesting fact I learned while doing my research on the Holocaust for my informative speech.
    Don’t be so sensitive.

  4. So Elizabeth, if someone uses Jill’s theories about the evils of abortion to kill a bunch of nurses in an abortion clinic, that makes JILL guilty somehow?
    And if someone uses Jesus’ theories as an exucse to murder gay people, that makes Jesus’s theories “scary stuff” too, no?
    I’m not quite sure I follow your logic here. It’s not like Darwin and Hitler were sitting around high-fiving each other.
    Also, I think Andrew Dice Clay is the missing link between man and ape. Though if I had to choose between him and an ape, I’d go with the ape.
    But on an unrelated note folks… check this kid out:
    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/0804/wrestling.dustin.carter/content.1.html

  5. “The euthanasia killing program was no Nazi abberation; rather, it was the efficient application through public policy of the theories of leading scientists and philosophers in Western soceity. Darwin’s theories of evolution, combined with the rediscovery of Mendelian law, had encouraged Victorians in the belief that the biological world could be knowable, as predictable, as Newton’s physical world. Proponents of social Darwinism and the “science” of eugenics sought to apply evolutionary and genetic principles, as then understood, to human society and breeding.”
    “The Holocaust and History”
    Edited by Michael Berenbaum, Published in Association with the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum

  6. Amanda and Hiero,
    I was just pointing out an interesting tidbit of info. I learned while doing some research for a speech.
    There was no hidden agenda, don’t be so cynical ladies.

  7. Oh Jill, don’t tell me that you are a creationist, too! Schools can teach creationism all they want in religion class, but it is not science. Nothing about it is scientific, and it should not be taught in any class purporting be about science.
    Elizabeth, the misuse of Darwin’s writings by Hitler or anyone else is relative to its veracity as a scientific theory exactly how? You may have intended no hidden agenda, but it came off as an attack, kind of like if someone mentioned the bible, and the first thing I replied was, “Did you know that the bible has been used to justify the killing of millions of people through history?”

  8. I really was just sharing an interesting tidbit of research I found out, Ray..I’m not saying that Hitler wasn’t a nutball because he used science to back up his mass-murder of people..I just stated it as an interesting piece of info.
    And when I said, “Scary stuff” I meant that it was scary that people can use just about anything to justify their delusions.
    Seriously, we are all so tightly wound around here sometimes lol.

  9. Jill, that’s outright wrong.
    Richard Dawkins got in because he showed his passport. He doesn’t have a U.S. ID because he’s NOT AMERICAN. In the U.S., having a passport is the valid ID to show.
    Clinton is not his surname, it’s his first name.
    PZ Myers shouldn’t have been kicked out because he was interviewed for the movie. In what ethical film business is someone interviewed and then later now allowed to see the movie? He was also under the impression they were filming a different kind of movie… Why should a movie have to deceive the people it films? Hmm?
    Other atheists got into the movie. They were not kicked out. Some wrote reviews. More reviews.
    I’m actually a little sad I missed it when it came to Chicago. I could have used a laugh.

  10. And… Hitler was more motivated by Christianity. He backed up his motivation with Darwinism.
    The holocaust was not a result of science. It was a result of religion.

  11. That’s not really true, Anon.
    I would explain in further detail but I gotta make dinner and color with the babe.

  12. Here we go, line by line:
    “two Darwinian defenders, who were paid to be interviewed for the film but came out looking like buffoons, tried to bust into a private screening in MN.”
    First of all, they obviously took the two out of context in the movie. In Dawkins’s review he clearly explains his interview in context.
    Second of all “bust” is wrong. It’s more like “signed up to go,” all you needed to do was fill out a form, and PZ signed up with his full name and got guest tickets for his family and friend (Dawkins, who had been there for a convention).
    ” much as he condones expelling professors who deviate from the monkey line”
    Not really, he just doesn’t condone bad science. Any teacher who does shouldn’t be there. We want GOOD science teachers right? compared to the world and judging by what I read and observe here, we are desperately lacking.
    “Richard Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist at Oxford who wrote the book, The God Delusion, gained entry by signing in with his formal surname, Clinton”
    Actually he came in as Myers’ guest, he was not on the sheet, which is why he was not so obviously expelled from the premiere of the movie that he and Myers were featured in and THANKED in the CREDITS. Myers was thrown out who was standing right next to Dawkins. You can tell it was a premeditated explusion.
    “Then, according to CNS, Myers attempted to disrupt an Expelled conference call with reporters the next day.”
    Well he did get in to call them out on their lies. Actually go to his BLOG he explains everything in great detail there.
    “present a bill supporting academic freedom.”
    That bill is definitely a creationist proponent bill in disguise, if you read it. We should never support academic dishonesty, least of all LEGALLY. It’s pretty scary.
    “In Expelled, atheism and evolution are shown to be chained together with no missing link. These tie to the abortion issue by equating humans as mere highly developed animals, certainly not created in the image of God.”
    Oh please, haven’t we already been through this.
    The most dishonest part of the film (where PZ Myers interrupted in the call) is them paralleling darwin’s theory to the holocaust. Besides Dawkins’ great explanation of how Darwin never indicated an interest in applying his theory to sociological standards, but antisemitism was alive and well in Germany and Europe LONG before Origin was published. Same with artificial selection–which has been around for over 2,000 years.

  13. Thanks for the links, Edyt. I knew this had to be a gasbag of a film, and it is nice to have my suspicions confirmed.
    Elizabeth, you are going to have a hard time disproving Edyt’s assertion about Hitler and Christianity. There is a lot of material out there to support it.

  14. Jill I’m surprised you don’t see the blatant lying and hypocrisy shown by the producers of Expelled. Talk about using “anything to justify your beliefs.”

  15. Ray, 4:45p, of course I’m an Intelligent Design proponent, which even takes less faith than believing in evolution.
    And your Big Bang Theory? Sounds mighty Biblical to me.

  16. Elizabeth, you are going to have a hard time disproving Edyt’s assertion about Hitler and Christianity. There is a lot of material out there to support it.
    I’m not saying there was no religion involved in Hitler’s “logic,” but all my readings have focused much on eugenics and the science behind Hitler’s thinking and external forces responsible for the Holocaust.

  17. So how do they plan to expel scientists from the movie once it is released in theaters?
    Will everyone entering have to swear they are true believers in creation before they get a ticket?
    Apparently the movie is ridiculous, and I expect it to panned as soon as the public gets a glance.

  18. Anon, in Florida they paid students to go see the movie and even then only about 100 people showed up! A complete flop. Hopefully the rest of America does the same.

  19. Jill I’m surprised you don’t see the blatant lying and hypocrisy shown by the producers of Expelled. Talk about using “anything to justify your beliefs.”
    Posted by: prettyinpink at April 2, 2008 5:16 PM
    You obviously didn’t get the memo. Lying for Jesus is A-OK. Lying is only bad if it’s an alleged lie from Planned Parenthood.

  20. >Ray, 4:45p, of course I’m an Intelligent Design proponent, which even takes less faith than believing in evolution.
    >And your Big Bang Theory? Sounds mighty Biblical to me.
    Who said anything about the Big Bang? Personally I believe the universe was created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster, shaped entirely by His noodley appendages.
    http://www.venganza.org/
    Seriously, Jill, you are welcome to believe in creationism, but that doesn’t make it so, nor does it make it something that belongs in a science classroom. Incidentally, I notice that you cling to the term “intelligent design.” The PBS documentary Judgement Day: Intelligent Design on Trial does an thorough job of debunking the idea that ID is anything other than creationism re-labeled. Have you watched it?
    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/program.html

  21. >I’m not saying there was no religion involved in Hitler’s “logic,” but all my readings have focused much on eugenics and the science behind Hitler’s thinking and external forces responsible for the Holocaust.
    Perhaps you ought to expand your readings, Elizabeth.

  22. PIP:
    I’m sorry I’ve got to crash your party.
    In fact, Intelligent Design is the only thing that makes sense.
    Let me ask you PIP if God was not the Intelligent Designer, then why do you believe in Him, if you even do?

  23. “Can’t wait to see Expelled. I think we’ve only just begun to hear the primates scream.”
    Jill, you’re too funny!
    I’m not even gonna touch the Hilter and religion mess except to say that some of you (and you KNOW who you are) have to stop believing EVERYTHING you read in the newspapers. Geez.

  24. >In fact, Intelligent Design is the only thing that makes sense.
    Actually, HisMan, when you compare them in detail, the Flying Spaghetti Monster clearly makes more sense than your so-called “intelligent design” (see my above post about the PBS documentary), and more accurately explains the available empirical evidence.

  25. @HisMan: If there was “intelligent design” than God wasn’t terribly intelligent…bipedalism anybody? Narrow hip girdle? You know what those things lead to? Death during childbirth. Childbirth used to be the leading cause of death among women of childbearing age up until the 1950’s in the US. However, in other countries not as developed as ours, childbirth is still a major cause of death.
    Bipedalism was not intelligent.

  26. Perhaps you ought to expand your readings, Elizabeth.
    Why?
    I’m doing just fine in my research. Hitler was a nutball who would use any grasping at straws to justify his hateful attitude. What does it matter if it was Christianity or science? I REALLY was just pointing out something interesting I read that I didn’t know before, and this thread was talking about Darwinism, so I thought it was appropriate. Like I said, don’t get your panties in a bunch buddy.

  27. These tie to the abortion issue by equating humans as mere highly developed animals, certainly not created in the image of God.

    So? It doesn’t follow that killing each other is OK just because we evolved.

  28. From the clip that I watched of “Expelled”, it seemed to me it was the point that people who believe in intelligent design, or God, are ridiculed and punished for their beliefs. Supposedly in a society that encourages freedom of speech, if the “speech” is about intelligent design, you may just pay dearly for it!
    What do evolutionists have to fear about someone believing that God intricitely designed us? They can’t call this a “lie”, because, from what I’ve read from professional evolutionists, is that evolution is still a theory.

  29. Why does it bother you that atheists see the movie? From what I’ve heard, there have been people banned from seeing the movie just because they might not agree with it. Seems pretty ridiculous that you don’t want us heathens to see the light. Btw, the kid who was accompanying Dawkins was refused entry to the film- and they let Dawkins go right in!

  30. “Let me ask you PIP if God was not the Intelligent Designer, then why do you believe in Him, if you even do?”
    I believe in theistic evolution, NOT intelligent design. Intelligent design (the movement) has defined itself as OPPOSED to evolution, rather than reconciliation. Should be noted that “theistic evolution” is a philosophical position and NOT a scientific one.
    “Narrow hip girdle?”
    Actually read an article that it helps with the fact that humans can run endurance much better than primates–possibly an evolutionary contribution to running. (GO exercise phys!)

  31. @PiP: We may be able to run and use our hands for things but we still can barely fit a baby’s skull through our birth canals…

  32. If we actually evolved from monkeys, what are monkeys still doing here?
    But think about this, people adapt to different environments. Melanin (sp?) develops differently in people from different climates. Supposedly people can gradually change races over thousands of years. Take me and Jill. If Jill and I had children, and they lived in Africa, exposed to the eliminates for twenty thousand years they would eventually become black to save themselves from the damages of the climate (position to the sun).

  33. PIP,
    Am I wrong? Please, enlighten me! I really thought that evolution was still a theory. I haven’t seen the headlines boldy declare that evolution has finally been proven in my lifetime. If I’m wrong, though, please let me know!
    Here’s what I was trying to say from wikipedia:
    Evolution is often said to be both theory and fact. This statement, or something similar, is frequently seen in biological literature. The point of this statement is to differentiate the concept of the “fact of evolution”, namely the observed changes in populations of organisms over time, with the “theory of evolution”, namely the current scientific explanation of how those changes came about.
    I don’t deny that changes have come about over time to organisms. I do, however, deny the evolutionists explanation of how those changes came about. I believe in “Intelligent Design”.
    Now, relate my belief and explanation to the topic that Jill posted, and hopefully that will clear up for you where I was coming from, which will, I pray, stop your brain from burning. Nobody likes a burning brain!

  34. Jess,
    They will only concede what they don’t think directly threatens them.
    For example, after being proven wrong again and again they conceded “microevolution” and not “macroevolution” nevermind that there really is no difference.

  35. “I really thought that evolution was still a theory.”
    Yeah evolution is a theory, but it’s not a theory as in “I saw a dog with spots, now I have a theory!” It has to be tested, it has to predict phenomena, and it explains a series of facts. So “just a theory” is really inaccurate.
    “”fact of evolution”, namely the observed changes in populations of organisms over time, with the “theory of evolution”, namely the current scientific explanation of how those changes came about.”
    Yes that is true. Evolution is both fact and theory. The theory is the mechanism that explains the facts.
    “I do, however, deny the evolutionists explanation of how those changes came about.”
    For what reason?

  36. @JLM: Yes, evolution is a theory, but a scientific theory is different form say…a philosophical theory.
    Gravity is a theory, yet we all acknowledge that it’s a real phenomenon, correct?

  37. PIP,
    Don’t have the time or energy to discuss it again. No offense, but it’s me, not you!
    To summarize, though, we just have different beliefs. Mine comes from that we are created in God’s image, and I refuse to believe that God was a ball of gas, and that my ancestors are rocks. I know your explanation is much, much more than that, but I choose to remain simplified with mine.

  38. “I refuse to believe that God was a ball of gas”
    But doesn’t the Bible teach us God is impotent?

  39. I believe in the science behind evolution, but I also believe God is the creator of all life.
    I understand that there is a scientific way of looking at things and then there is a theological one. Science cannot measure the spiritual for that lies in the believer. Science can only measure physical absolutes, as in things that can be tested, and since there is no way to really measure God scientifically, that’s why mixing the 2 can create a conflict within people.

  40. Well, the whole ancestors being rocks *definitely* explains a lot when it comes to my mom’s side of the family…lol.

  41. Rae,
    Gravity is a theory, yet we all acknowledge that it’s a real phenomenon, correct?
    That was good! But it’s still a theory that only encompasses what the human mind can comprehend, and has never been measured ALOT of other places in our galaxy!
    “The existence of tides is often taken as a proof of gravity, but this is logically flawed. Because if the moon’s

  42. @JLM: What happens when you drop a rock? Does it hit the ground or does it sit and float there? Not trying to be snotty, but yeah, gravity is pretty much fact, even though it’s technically “a theory”.
    Have you ever taken a course in physics? Yeah, the math is pretty much borderline satanic (har, I maintain that math is of the devil :-p) but it does a good job of explaining things like gravity and interplanetary stuff.
    I don’t know enough about tides to say anything on that matter to be honest, I’ve actually never really heard that about them.

  43. Well, the whole ancestors being rocks *definitely* explains a lot when it comes to my mom’s side of the family…lol.
    LOL!!! Keep it up, and I’ll start believing in evolution! I can SOOOOOO relate to that one!!! That was too funny!

  44. @JLM: :D Awesome.
    Now I love my mother very much, but she once asked me, “Do Canadians celebrate Christmas”
    Once my grandma (my mom’s mom) asked me, “Do black people get hotter in the sun because their skin is darker?”
    I kid you not.

  45. @JLM: What happens when you drop a rock? Does it hit the ground or does it sit and float there? Not trying to be snotty, but yeah, gravity is pretty much fact, even though it’s technically “a theory”.
    Oh, I totally understand and believe that in my comprehension, and experience, I wouldn’t deny gravity as a HUGE part of my life (oh, if my butt could talk!!!)
    My point, was, is that what we know to be fact to us isn’t always the entire picture. There is no way of measuring gravity in every instance in every situation on every galaxy.
    Kindof like evolution…you can explain the theory here on earth, but you can’t test the theory in every aspect of every given situation in every galaxy.

  46. When I read “intelligent falling” in the onion I considered it to be a joke :P
    I have no idea what you are talking about. I’m sorry.

  47. Rae,
    I am still laughing, side-splitting laughter…over the rock comment. I love it!!!!
    You really made my night…thank you!

  48. Once my grandma (my mom’s mom) asked me, “Do black people get hotter in the sun because their skin is darker?”
    L.O.L.
    omg…I can’t stop laughing.

  49. Once my grandma (my mom’s mom) asked me, “Do black people get hotter in the sun because their skin is darker?”
    I am so going to be in trouble here…I can just feel it! I mean no offense, I was just such a “rock” when I was younger!!!
    I asked almost the same exact question when I was in the fourth grade. My exact comment, when my teacher was talking about how the color black absorbs heat, was, “Oh, is that why black people sweat so much?”
    The class laughed, and my teacher got very mad at me! I didn’t realize it back then, but I do now! I think I came from the same boulder your grandma did! LOL!

  50. And more proof I came from a rock…here’s a good one:
    When I was in my mid-twenties (not kidding), one day a light went on when I was looking at a clock.
    I finally figured it out, and was so excited to tell my mom…I said to her, “oh…THAT’S why they call it a second hand!!! I could never figure out why it was called the second hand, if it was actually the third! Ooooooooohhhhhh…second, like in one second, two seconds, three…..NOW I GET IT!!!
    My mom said not a word.

  51. @JLM: Hehehe. I suppose on one hand I can understand that that could be…confusing?
    May I ask what color your hair is?

  52. I’ve got one, I’ve got one!
    One time we were at a baseball game, maybe the White Sox I think it was…and it was the 7th inning stretch…and everybody was getting up, and a lot of people were leaving the stands, and I go to my mom:
    “Mom, what’s going on? Is the game over?”
    She laughed at me.
    I STILL can’t live that one down.

  53. Don’t worry JLM, I am actually naturally sorta blond. I dye it brown… ;-p
    I’m the other way around…I figured, “if the shoe fits”…

  54. Elizabeth,
    That’s a good one, indeed!!!
    I’m going to go to bed now…this has been so enjoyable, I’d like to go to bed with a smile on my face for once!
    Thank you girls, so much!! Have a good night!

  55. Sorry Rae:
    Your slip is showing.
    God didn’t screw it up, we did.
    It’s called The Fall and your lack of understanding is monumental proof that the Fall was fast and far and…..furious.

  56. Why do Darwinist always leave out the whole title of his book On The Origin of Species?
    Because it is racist.
    On The Origin of Species By Natural Selection, Or The Preservation of Favored Races by Natural Selection In The Struggle of Life.
    In the struggle for life, one may murder your own flesh and blood to preserve your racial SSelf
    , because it is a punishment to have your own flesh and blood eat off you first, before they eat off others their whole life.
    The religion of Abortion, principle belief number one.
    Hitler, the religion of abortion selectively applied to German’s today, after failing to be a favored race twice in one century.
    The Inquiring mind wants to know exactly what was in the Christian German, while Christian German’s, in the hinterland of the USA, did not become rabid racist, in their struggle for life? Hmmm, must haven’t been the Christian religion was the cause of those German’s becoming racist in their struggle for life, or German-American Christians would have been allies of their bubba’s in their fatherland, which they were not.
    Soo much for the “blame the Christian” bigoty logic. Anti- Christians derange themselves in their world where logic and reason are consumed by their bigotry.

  57. Why do Darwinist always leave out the whole title of his book On The Origin of Species?
    Because it is racist.
    On The Origin of Species By Natural Selection, Or The Preservation of Favored Races by Natural Selection In The Struggle of Life.

    I had to check this out and you’re right!
    WOW, I had no idea…this explains so much. No wonder Hitler was so into darwinism!

  58. How did we screw up having a hip girdle that is too small to easily pass babies through the birth canal? Anatomically, the female hip girdle is too shallow to easily pass babies through.
    So did God make hip girdles deep enough at first but after the grand screw up that was “the fall” he magically shrank it down as punishment?

  59. Dude,
    Back then “race” didn’t refer to people with different colored skin, it referred to “species” or “varieties.” Keep it in context guys. Darwin actually opposed racial inequality and eugenics.

  60. Wow, that is interesting! Even in my bio. books the whole title isn’t in there! Weird! I didn’t even know that was the whole title cause I had NEVER read that one before.
    pip, then WHY do they omit it from biology textbooks..they could just explain it in the reading that race didn’t apply to people of color, it applied to species variety.
    I’m just curious as to why they don’t put it in textbooks, cause it isn’t in any of mine.

  61. Dudette,
    Of course it referred to different skin colors, since skin colors are what differentiate between humans.
    Darwin was a typical example of Victorian racism which brought you the phrase, the whiteman’s burden via Kipling.
    If a question may be asked to any Darwin student,it must simply be this;
    If humans were descendended from apes, where does the white skin and blue eyes come from? Where did those traits evolve from PIP?
    Guess there is no value today in asking that question amongst Darwinist, but it was a question asked amongst followers of Darwin up and till Hitler used that question to differentiate his race state from other race states. And why not? Charles Galton DARWIN was the Eugenics Society Director and lifetime member of that society.
    Besides, PIPETTE, you do know what Mein Kampf translates to in English; My Struggle. Coincidence? I don’t think soo since Hitler was using Darwin, to justify his race state expansion as a struggle for living space. Or defending his race in the Volga(German explorers!!!) or Poland, or where ever a German race had settled. Just as those fellow murderers of innocent humans and admirers of Hitler call their life a jihad today.
    Now, take the good with the bad PIPette, and be honest with yourself and don’t try and deny that Darwin and his theories were not used by Hitler the KKK, to Sanger. They all justify their evil acts upon others, to advance a more perfect race in their struggle for a more perfect race.

  62. Also, I think Andrew Dice Clay is the missing link between man and ape. Though if I had to choose between him and an ape, I’d go with the ape.
    **************
    Gods truth, that!

  63. Science cannot be based on the supernatural. It just does not work that way. I went to church with a very old woman who insisted that dinosaurs never existed and that fossils were just a communist plot. Even my mama thought the lady was a couple of tacos shy a combo platter.

  64. Social darwinism may have been Hitlers rationale for killing the mentally handicapped but it had nothing at all to do with his attack on the Jews, Poles, Gypsies etc.

  65. Saw ‘Expelled’ last night. Planned Parenthood is going to freak out! The movie actually ties darwinian evolution to hitler and the nazis (rightly so), which turned into a talk about eugenics, and I couldn’t believe it when they mentioned famous eugenicist Margaret Sanger as the founder of Planned Parenthood. Go Expelled!

  66. Trying to pretend that attitudes towards race havent changed in 100 is ridiculous and that IS what you are doing when you whine about Sanger being a social darwinist. That makes as much sense as ranting about the number of slave owners who helped frame the BOR and Constitution. Sanger died before Roe V Wade. When she founded PP abortion wasnt legal. She founded PP to teach poor women of ALL races about contraceptives to help PREVENT abortions. We had STATES which justified forcing women to have tubal ligations and even hysterectomies all in the name of ‘the good of society’. Ranting and raving about the ‘roots’ of PP is absolutely idiotic.

  67. yllas,
    go to kkk.com–funny that evolution isn’t mentioned. What’s that on the banner?

  68. “pip, then WHY do they omit it from biology textbooks..they could just explain it in the reading that race didn’t apply to people of color, it applied to species variety.”
    It doesn’t really matter, Origin of Species is the main title. Many movies and books with a second title are called by their main title instead. Most science textbooks aren’t really there to lecture about racism, they care about the science inside the book. That’s what matters.
    “Of course it referred to different skin colors, since skin colors are what differentiate between humans. ”
    Darwin realized we are the same species. He was an abolitionist. You need to look at things in context.
    “If humans were descendended from apes, where does the white skin and blue eyes come from? Where did those traits evolve from PIP?”
    Migration to different environments. White skin allows for more vitamin D absorption from the sun in colder climates.
    “Guess there is no value today in asking that question amongst Darwinist”
    This is where you are beginning to make no sense.
    “Besides, PIPETTE, you do know what Mein Kampf translates to in English; My Struggle. Coincidence?”
    Look at your history. Anti-semitism was alive and well in Europe long before Darwin’s book. Nobody seemed to really like the Jews there for a LONG time, really sad.
    “Now, take the good with the bad PIPette, and be honest with yourself and don’t try and deny that Darwin and his theories were not used by Hitler the KKK, to Sanger. They all justify their evil acts upon others, to advance a more perfect race in their struggle for a more perfect race.”
    I just think you have to see reality, that Darwin’s theory about nature was never meant to support sociological constructs like social darwinism. There is quite a bit of difference between the two. Would you say Christianity is to blame for people who do crazy stuff in the name of Christianity, and taking it out of context?

  69. I suspect a whole lot of members of the KKK are fundamentalists christians who do not believe in evolution

  70. Dude,
    Back then “race” didn’t refer to people with different colored skin, it referred to “species” or “varieties.” Keep it in context guys. Darwin actually opposed racial inequality and eugenics.
    Posted by: prettyinpink at April 3, 2008 8:51 AM

    If this is true, then why is Darwin quoted as saying this….(from “The Descent of Man”)

  71. Soo, it is vitamin C that made white skin color, huh PIPette? Or is cold weather making skin color white? What has cold got to do with the origin of white skin PIPette? Gee, those Eskimo’s should have been as white as a snow leopard, huh, PIP? Or the Mongolians(which Eskimos are) in the Siberian wasteland? And sunlight? What a joke answer Pipette.
    But, alas, defending Darwin by telling me that white skin color is from adaptions and mutations to vitamin c, is as crack pot an answer as Hitler’s race theories based on Darwin.
    Now, take a crack pot answer at eye color being blue Pipette. Why did the color blue, orginate in the eye of humans, and offer as a advantage in the struggle for existence Pipette? A need for vitamin B12 by the eye Pipette? A adaption to cold weather PIPette. Again, followers of Darwin simply wanted to answer the orgin,adaption,mutation of two traits of human beings. Hitler used the “science of Darwin” to make social changes in society, about race and its origins. It’s that simple PIPette. Darwin was used by Hitler, to make up a race theory of German’s having a right to struggle for their
    favored race, in the struggle for life.
    You just don’t want to get the connection between Hitler and Darwin since it makes Darwin a contributor to racism, which he was and is.
    BTW, PIPette, I didn’t know that Jews were a race, I thought Jews were a religion? Seems your using Hitler racism to define a religion, by using that word Semite? Are Semites a race too Pipette?
    You know, Christianty was a “foreign religion” to those German’s Hitler appealed to. Came with those Jews who invaded his sacred pagan lands of the German’s.
    The reason you have no idea where white skin color and blue eyes comes from, or orginated PIP, is that the science of Darwin wants to ignore and forget their historical connection to the rise of Hitler and his use of Darwin.
    But, you do know, that the more one knows about the origins of the “blue in a eye”, is extremely important to knowing the complete etiology of the degeneration of the macula of the eye, PIP.
    AMD, is predominant in blue eyed people PIP.
    Wet or dry version.
    You know, blue light, or UVA goes right through those blue eyes, PIPette.
    So, where did blue eyes and white skin orginate from PIPette, Darwin and his fellow scientist were more curious then you Pipette. Vitamins, what a crack pot answer, from a serious student of scientific studies.

  72. I suspect a whole lot of members of the KKK are fundamentally related to Texasred. Like mommy, pappy, grandpappy, great grandpappy, and right back to the days when they were lynching what was left of those Mexican Catholics in the friendly state to establish their ranches.
    Afterall, look at the writing of Texasredneck concerning Catholics on this board.
    What a pendejo. Care to tell the board what I just called you TexasREDneck?

  73. Once my grandma (my mom’s mom) asked me, “Do black people get hotter in the sun because their skin is darker?”
    L.O.L.
    omg…I can’t stop laughing.
    Posted by: Elizabeth at April 2, 2008 10:52 PM
    ********************
    My boss would say black people ARE hotter than white people …..

  74. “If this is true, then why is Darwin quoted as saying this….(from “The Descent of Man”)”
    He was obviously comparing past humans to (then) present humans. This person did a better job of explaining than I:
    “However, it would be unfair to suggest that Darwin condemned these merciful acts; that was not the intention of the quote presented above. He was simply providing evidence for the theory that humans have evolved a more sophisticated moral sensibility than other animals. In the passage following the quote above he states that eliminating acts of human sympathy would result in the “deterioration in the noblest part of our nature.” Even though some intelligence theorists advocating the hereditarian position have used Darwinian ideas to support eugenicist goals like forced sterilization, it is very likely that Darwin himself would have objected to these practices:

  75. The KKK are pro-life Christians.
    Darwin was racist, yes. Again, when you take away historical context, you lose a lot of information!
    Hitler used Darwin’s ideas to justify the Holocaust, but his motivation was based on anti-semitism stemming from Christian teachings!
    Motivation and justification are very different!
    And… Intelligent design is largely propogated by a whole group of people who don’t know a whole lot about science.
    My suggestion: before you brush it off, read a little bit more about it and learn how science theories and laws are decided.
    Evolution does not disprove the existence of God. Nor should the Bible be taken as a science textbook.
    In the old days, before people had science, they used myths to explain how their world existed. Who is to say the authors of the Bible were not just rewriting their myths? That doesn’t mean they were right.
    Actually, creation myths are pretty interesting. I happen to like the Japenese creation myth. Pretty cool stuff.

  76. Evolution does not disprove the existence of God. Nor should the Bible be taken as a science textbook.
    I totally agree Edyt.

  77. pip, then WHY do they omit it from biology textbooks..they could just explain it in the reading that race didn’t apply to people of color, it applied to species variety.”
    It doesn’t really matter, Origin of Species is the main title. Many movies and books with a second title are called by their main title instead. Most science textbooks aren’t really there to lecture about racism, they care about the science inside the book. That’s what matters
    I wouldn’t really call it lecturing, but more a clarification that race applies to species, not to colors of skin.
    That relates to science..the word race applies to species of organisms..how is that not science-related?
    It is still interesting that the whole name isn’t published in biology textbooks…it does make one wonder…

  78. Well Elizabeth, if it is an outdated word, why use it? To use benign example, it’s like a textbook now using “gay” to mean happy. Thus, “Darwin was gay” would have a different meaning, right?
    Several books have 2nd titles. But how many of them are used in descriptive literature? When it’s unimportant with the subject matter? In the cited literature it is almost always cited with the 2nd title. It is under the citations of the first chapter of my book, full 1st and 2nd titles.
    If the 2nd title is redundant and outdated why would it be an important fixture for textbooks? I honestly don’t understand the big deal.
    My textbook explores creationists’ fallacies and why they are wrong; “Darwin was racist” is not among them because it’s a pretty stupid accusation; as if that has anything to do with its validity at all. Not to mention the fact that he was (for his time period) not very racist at all.

  79. It is still interesting that the whole name isn’t published in biology textbooks…it does make one wonder…

    It’s quite a long title. When we read Hamlet in English class, we didn’t refer to it as The Tragicall Historie of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark either.

  80. PIP:
    You are allowing yourself to be led astray.
    Where to? Away from God.
    Stop blogging for a while, and talk to the One who can reveal Truth to you. Ask Him to reveal Himself to you.
    He says, “When you seek Me with all your heart, you will find Me.” It’s a promise.
    PIP: You are NOT seeking HIM. He can’t be found in a textbook or college class or by sitting under the influence of a Professor who is as lost as you are.

  81. PIP stay strong. You’re smart, you’re better off with truth than with superstition.

  82. Pipettte,
    Gee, Pipette, those arctic regions receive plenty of sunshine. Why Mt Everest gives one more UVA/sunlight and cold then living in a mild warm climate. Oh, OH, those Tibetans aren’t turning into blue eyed, white skinned Mongolians are they Pipette? Still no answer to the orgins of white skin as a trait of Caucasians, except some blather about vitamins.
    According to you then, and your theory about white skin, one can simply add vitamin D to a person of a black or brown pigmented person, add in some cold weather, and with some time they will have white skin. But that is not a genetic answer, PIP. Gee, I thought skin color was genetic if one is trying to find the answer to skin color, and not crack pot ideas about lacking a vitamin. Mongolians have lived in the same area of the world as northern Caucasians since scientist have discovered and recorded their “bones and artifacts”. Same conditions exactly(food,temperature, sunlight etc.), but different skin /eye color, crack pot.
    So, explain to me again why the history of the Mongolian race, in the same cold/light conditions as those Estonians are still not white skinned with blue eyes, PIPette. Or “flip it around” if you care PIPette. But, maybe you can give me some time references when a person who has natural brown skin,brown eyes, from being genetic descendent of a ape, turned into a person with white skin and those blue eyes PIPette.
    Fact is, blue eyes are the worst color one can have for reducing UVA penetration of the macula, in a climate with extra UVA.
    Your not able to answer the question of where white skin/blue eyes orginated/adapted/mutated, in humans, from being totally ignorant of that verbotten question, PIPette. And for all your edumacted blather about science, it is nothing more then asking why, where, and how, PIP. Silly Pippy, a pedantic for the science of Darwin.
    No one is researching such questions today, from the simple fact that Hitler used Darwin in his research for that Aryan race of his. You know, blue eyes and white skin.
    As for Christians being a foreign religion in Europe, you haven’t got a clue then about pre-Christian Europe and their religious beliefs, do you PIP? Soo, Europe did not have religious beliefs before Christians showed up with their Semetic God, named Jesus, PIP? Now that is a insult to pagans, from the ignorance, I assume comes from being a Darwin defender of such hugh proportions, that one must deny the connection of Darwin and the pagan,pre-Christian loving Hitler.
    Jews, Christians, Hitler had no respect for them since those religions invaded his pagan fatherland and reduced his people to slaves and cowardly followers of those religions.
    Life is a struggle, and only the strong survive, and are worthy to survive in the struggle for life. That was Hitler’s theme song, which is repeated in his book Mein Kampf (Struggle). Think that is Christian theology PIP? And if you do, your more a crack pot then I thought.

  83. “Still no answer to the orgins of white skin as a trait of Caucasians, except some blather about vitamins. ”
    The leading hypothesis has to do with melanin concentrations as a function of climate (and UV concentrations). I’m sure there is a LOT of research about this topic. Why don’t you look into it?
    “According to you then, and your theory about white skin, one can simply add vitamin D to a person of a black or brown pigmented person, add in some cold weather, and with some time they will have white skin. But that is not a genetic answer, PIP.”
    Duh you are putting words in my mouth.
    ….do you understand natural selection……at ALL?
    Phenotype reflects genotype. Skin color is a phenotype based on a genotype with several alleles.
    Of course it is still being researched today….these hypotheses that I have read about have been recently developed.
    “As for Christians being a foreign religion in Europe, you haven’t got a clue then about pre-Christian Europe and their religious beliefs, do you PIP? ”
    If you hadn’t noticed, Hitler wasn’t in Germany in pre-Christian times. He was within the last century. If you wanna tell me that there weren’t Christians in Germany by the time Hitler was born I think you are a crack pot.
    BTW, Catholic and Christian theology doesn’t say life is all cupcakes and unicorns.
    ANYWAY, you aren’t even bringing up an argument, just a long string of nonsense. If you can’t bring in a rational thought or a real argument I don’t really wanna talk about it anymore. If anyone is willing to make some sense stay here and I’ll chat.
    I’m through with you.

  84. HisMan,
    I really want you to read Finding Darwin’s God:A Scientist’s Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution.
    I think he understands how I see it very well and can explain it more thoroughly and briefly than I ever could.
    Can you read it, for me?

  85. Edyth. Are you going to deny that Catholics are Christians just as the KKK did too?
    You do know that Catholics were on the hate list of the KKK.
    Soo, when one post links, that lump all Christians together, as your link does, by not mentioning that one denomination of Christians were targeted by the KKK, your really exposing your facts are lacking from prejudice and bigotry towards all Christians.
    BTW Edyth, did Jews not own slaves and trade in slavery in the USA, and the rest of the world?
    Care to edumacte us about Jews who traded and sold slaves, as much as those so called Christians did? Got a link to that history of Jews and slavery as you do for those Christians Edyth? I didn’t think soo Edyth.
    Why in fact, one might suggest that “white slavery” was as common as “black slavery” in those areas of the so called Semetic peoples, and their religions.
    Which brings up a question about Jews and slavery. Which forgotten Jew made slavery, just not right, and a sin against their God Edyth?
    I know a movie came out concerning the history of making chattel slavery illegal in England and his name was Wilberforce,a Christian preacher?. What name of a historical Jew can you direct/link me to, that came forward to denounce slavery as Wiberforce did, and ended modern day chattel slavery?

  86. Pipette,
    baffling one with bullsh=t is always the last refuge of a person who really is not answering a simple question.
    Your lost in the forest of words and babble when I only ask you to explain why, when and where did white skin and blue eyes orginate in humans. You mention vitamins and I think your being a crack pot since Mongolians must also lack that vitamin too from living in the same exact conditions as the white skinned,blue eyed, Caucasian did. And you have made a great assumption that Caucasians orginated only in those cold, light deprived regions, since tomorrow “another dig” might disprove that assumption, PIP.
    Sum it up Pip, without a appeal to authority as your doing to deflect your ignorance of answering a question about the origins of white skin color and eye color. So far you have summed up skin color as being from a vitamin lacking, which is totally not genetic of course.
    Quite simply, no one knows where,when, why, white skin and blue eye color orginated in the evolution of humans beings, descended from a ape.
    It is a question that has no worth today, but it motivated many Darwinist in their search for the origin of blue eyes and white pigmented, skin color which differentiated that race, from other races. Why does it matter?, because “who came first” was the most “advanced race” according to Darwinist in the days when Hitler was being exposed to Darwin’s theories about the origins and “the preservation of a favored races by natural selection in the stuggle for life”.
    Hitler used Darwin to make mass murder easier for those racist minded German’s of his day. Hitler appealed to the pre-Christian era of German’s through making them a separate race, by pre-dating Christianty by thousands of years of race evolution among so called German’s. Darwin was the scientist, Hitler was the social preacher for the preservation of favored races through natural selection in the struggle for life. It was a “perfect storm” of science meeting society, and the appeal to the authority of the modern science of the day named in a book by Darwin, that included in the title, “the preservation of favored races by natural selection in the struggle for life”. And if you deny that PIP, your a hopeless case of prejudice from your dogmatic faith in Evolution being not involved in 19th and early 20th century society in Germany.
    And for that weak excuse about the title being shortened on the cover, get real, inside any book, on the fly page, is room for a complete title. It ain’t there, from trying to erase the historical connection of Darwin and Hitler’s learning about race from Darwin and his fellow scientist.
    BTW, PIP, how many races are they in scientfic terms only? Got religion included in that race description as you did those Jews, with that “ethnic remark” about them being Semites? I bet you think Muslims are a race/ethnic group when you describe their religion too, PIP.
    Any person who mentions race as a description of religion is under the sway of Hitler to this day PIP. Semite? JEW? Really PIP. That is exactly what Hitler did to the religion known as Judaism, in Germany. He “evolved them back” to a area of the world where they were described as a Semite first, and a German second in the minds of Germans. Hey, those people with black hair and brown eyes are not really German’s, they are Semites. Invaders from years ago. A “not natural selected German” is the Jew, so sayeth Hitler. Then he seperated them again, from the “naturally selected German’s” by appealing to a religion before the time of those Jews(and Christians too) and their God myths. The appeal to the natural born German religion, was a pagan symbol that pre-dated Christians PIP. You know it of course as a spinning cross or whatever spin a pagan puts on it.
    You brought it up about Semites you unconscious racist, PIP, just as Hitler did when describing a religion.

  87. yllas, anyone who rambles as much as you does not deserve a thorough response. ‘Sides, I think you’re a troll. ;)

  88. Of course, Edyth.
    You have no answer to my questions concerning your prejudicial Christian link, and the history of the Judaism in the chattel slave trade.
    Attack the man not the question.
    In fact the only answer to my question about posting generalizations about Christians and chattel slave trading, is to do exactly as you did Edyth, which was to ignore my questions.
    Anyone who cannot restrain themselves from reading a troll post is obviously less intelligent then the so called troll.
    But, alas, Edyth is more concerned with her self image, and herself being asked a question taking to task her silly link devoted to generalizations about Christians and the KKK.
    I ignore post at this site from knowing the poster is a hopeless case of Edyth myths combined with a natural occuring prejudice and bigotry towards Christians. You being one of them Edyth.
    Which is to say, you won’t be able to not reply to me, from your weak self image, gained from weak sources about so called Christians, that fit your pre-ordained emotions about Christians.
    Why, Edyth, I might just be flaming you and not believe a word I wrote. Why, in fact, that is what I’m doing, flaming a troll named Edyth, and seeing if the idiot Edyth takes my post serious enough to post some ad hominem retort from not being intelligent to detect flame questions when they read them.
    Then again, maybe those questions are busting your self made bubble of prejudice Edyth.

  89. PIP wrote: “I really want you to read Finding Darwin’s God:A Scientist’s Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution.
    I think he understands how I see it very well and can explain it more thoroughly and briefly than I ever could.
    Can you read it, for me?
    Posted by: prettyinpink at April 3, 2008 11:57 PM”
    OK PIP, out of respect for you I will read it. I just ordered it from Amazon.com. I must tell you though that I have over 1,000 books in my personal library alone and I have read each one of them, sometimes more than three and four times each.
    In my younger days I thought it less than intelligent to just believe in the Creation account. As I have gotten more mature and have studied Intelligent Design, I am even more convinced now that the Creation Account is accurate.
    Why, because if you try to justify everything in the Bible PIP with science, then the goal is that all becomes explainable and nothing is miraculous and faith is unnecessary. What faith is required if everything I am to believe is provable? And what if our “science” does not support the Biblical claim? ….automatically the assumption is made that the Book is wrong. PIP, it is faith that pleases God for we walk by faith, not by sight.
    Let me give you a “scientific example” PIP. The Bible calls the stars and celestial bodies a curtain that will fall from the sky and reveal, I believe thr spiritual world. What is a curtain but a facade that hides the real thing? Do you not know that 99.99% of the stars visible in the sky are not there? In fact, I just read that the light from thr death of a Giant Star just reached the earth, an event that supposedley occurred millions of years ago. In other words, you see a phantom, something that is not there, a curtain, masquerading the real thing.
    If you only had the Old Testament to read and you knew the prophecies concerning the Messiah, Jesus, how could He be recognized or who would think he would come as He did? The very men that knew the OT inside and out, the teachers, the scribes, the “scientists” of the day, had the Truth, the Creator of the Universe, the Son of God, speaking, sitting, teaching, laughing, eating, crying, bleeding right in front of their eyes and could not recognize the One. “Who do you say that I am”, Jesus asked Peter, “You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God….and it is not flesh and blood that has revealed this to you Simon-Barjona, but my Father who is in Heaven.”
    Now, this does not mean that I have discarded my intellect and reason for it is God Himself who says, “come let us reason together”.
    What I see is science trying to disprove the Bible and its claims. I’m sorry PIP, science is not God, it is only at best, a humanly devised method or scheme of filling in the gaps of our limited experience and capacity to know. Do you think God needs science? Absolutely not, He knows everything!!!!! Most of the so-called scientific “facts” we knew 50 years ago, have been disproven or changed, but the Word of God endures forever. Were you nursed or breast fed?
    So, science does not impress me. It cannot save, it has not prevented death, in fact, many of its practitioners worship at the altar of this false god when it should be just seen as a tool, like a hammer….and, hammers break. Hammers can be used to build houses when used by the right people or to kill when used by the wrong people. To use science to try to disprove the Bible is absolutely the wrong use of that tool.
    PIP,
    I am an engineer with a Master’s Degree in Theology. I could get a Doctorate if I wasn’t so lazy. The creation account in Genesis is flawless as well as the Flood account.
    Scientists should humble themselves in the knowledge that it is a priviledge to be able to read this infinite, miraculous, deep, exquisitely interwoven book, called the Bible. For billions of people who went before us longed to see the revelation of the knowledge of the Sons of God. Without humility and the attitude of a child, the secrets in this book will never be explained by science or faithless men or professors or anyone, for a spiritual book must be discerned spiritually.
    Without faith it is impossible to please God.
    In Sum, God created the earth is six literal days, and on the seventh day He rested. That’s it, ‘nuf said. My understanding of the world around me needs to be molded by that assertion, otherwise, I fashion golden idols in my own or another’s image.
    Nighty-night.

  90. In Sum, God created the earth is six literal days, and on the seventh day He rested.
    ***************
    I’ve heard rabbis say that the old testament shouldnt be taken literally, that its made up of parables and the point is to learn from them, not take them at face value. HisMan wants to pretend he knows more about the OT than a Jewish scholar? Does HisMan also want to pretend the world is only 10,000 years old and that dinosaurs and man were alive at the same time?

  91. yllas, anyone who rambles as much as you does not deserve a thorough response. ‘Sides, I think you’re a troll. ;)
    Posted by: Edyt at April 4, 2008 2:07 AM
    ____
    LOL ya think? (Yup – Yllas is a troll)

  92. His Man,
    I think faith in an unseen God and in his son who performed miracles is pretty good. I don’t think there is any contradiction between science and religion, and I think Miller does a good job explaining it in his book.

  93. HisMan,
    If you don’t mind me asking,where did you receive your masters in theology?

  94. TR, it has happened twice, almost 3 times this week!
    I agree with you. (10:56 a.m.)
    Posted by: Elizabeth at April 4, 2008 1:22 PM
    ************
    Maybe we should both take a break and lay down for a bit with a cool cloth over our eyes ….

  95. TexasRed said, “Trying to pretend that attitudes towards race havent changed in 100 is ridiculous and that IS what you are doing when you whine about Sanger being a social darwinist. That makes as much sense as ranting about the number of slave owners who helped frame the BOR and Constitution. Sanger died before Roe V Wade. When she founded PP abortion wasnt legal. She founded PP to teach poor women of ALL races about contraceptives to help PREVENT abortions. We had STATES which justified forcing women to have tubal ligations and even hysterectomies all in the name of ‘the good of society’. Ranting and raving about the ‘roots’ of PP is absolutely idiotic.”
    Ummmm…no. First of all, Planned Parenthood has never said that Margaret Sanger was wrong about her beliefs, but rather give out an award in her name. Have you read her books? She advocated killing the handicapped, and limiting families to only two children. She said in her book “Women and the New Race” (which I own), “The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
    Why has Planned Parenthood failed to denounce these wicked things? I’ve never said that just because Planned Parenthood’s founder was a racist, that makes them racist now. (In fact, I don’t think the latest phone calls to PP are racist at all.) Until PP denounces the evil that Margaret Sanger espoused, we need to continue to expose the truth of their roots, and the possibility that they still hold dear the beliefs of their ‘dear’ Margaret Sanger.

Comments are closed.