If you are racist, there is a very good chance that you also believe in the theory of evolution. In fact, many of the most famous racists of the past 100 years were hardcore Darwinists. Of course this is not always true. For example, there are millions of radical jihadists in the Middle East that hate all Jews and want to wipe them off the face of the planet. But in general, if someone has a belief in evolution it is more likely that person will be a racist. You see, if you believe that everyone is created by God and is greatly loved by God, then there are no “inferior races”. We are just the “human race” made up of individuals that have been created in the image of God and that are exceedingly valuable. The second greatest commandment in the Bible is to love one another, and that leaves no room for racism at all. But if you believe that we are all just a bunch of highly evolved animals, that is a different story altogether. The logical conclusion is that some groups have “evolved” at a much slower pace than others and are thus “inferior”. This is what Charles Darwin believed, and this is what prominent disciples of Charles Darwin throughout history have believed.

For instance, just consider what Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, believed. She was convinced that sterilizing races that were less “evolved” was only rational

Sanger believed she was ‘working in accord with the universal law of evolution’. She maintained that the brains of Australian Aborigines were only one step more evolved than chimpanzees and just under blacks, Jews and Italians. When arguing for eugenics, Sanger quoted Darwin as an authority when discussing ‘natural checks’ of the population, such as war, which helped to reduce the population. Her magazine even argued for ‘state-sponsored sterilization programs’, forcibly sterilizing the ‘less capable’.

She was a hardcore racist, but this is not publicized by Planned Parenthood today. The following is one of her most disturbing quotes that I shared in one of my previous articles

“Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race.”

And she focused hard on setting up her “clinics” in minority communities. By doing so, she hoped “to stem the rising tide of color”

As her organization grew, Sanger set up more clinics in the communities of other ‘dysgenic races’—such as Blacks and Hispanics. Sanger turned her attention to ‘Negroes’ in 1929 and opened another clinic in Harlem in 1930. Sanger, ‘in alliance with eugenicists, and through initiatives such as the Negro Project … exploited black stereotypes in order to reduce the fertility of African Americans.’ The all-white staff and the sign identifying the clinic as a ‘research bureau’ raised the suspicions of the black community. They feared that the clinic’s actual goal was to ‘experiment on and sterilize black people’. Their fears were not unfounded: Sanger once addressed the women’s branch of the Klu Klux Klan in Silver Lake, New Jersey, and received a ‘dozen invitations to speak to similar groups’. Flynn claims that she was on good terms with other racist organizations.

Sanger believed the ‘Negro district’ was the ‘headquarters for the criminal element’ and concluded that, as the title of a book by a member of her board proclaimed, The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy, was a rise that had to be stemmed. To deal with the problem of resistance among the black population, Sanger recruited black doctors, nurses, ministers and social workers ‘in order to gain black patients’ trust’ in order ‘to limit or even erase the black presence in America’.

Today, the U.S. government gives hundreds of millions of dollars to the organization that she founded every single year.

That is absolutely sickening.

Another very prominent racist who was also a hardcore Darwinist was Adolf Hitler. The following are a couple of excerpts from Richard Weikart’s book entitled “Hitler’s Ethic: The Nazi Pursuit of Evolutionary Progress“…

In 1938 the Ministry of Education published an official curriculum handbook for the schools. This handbook mandated teaching evolution, including the evolution of human races, which evolved through “selection and elimination.” It stipulated, “The student must accept as something self-evident this most essential and most important natural law of elimination [of unfit] together with evolution and reproduction.” In the fifth class, teachers were instructed to teach about the “emergence of the primitive human races (in connection with the evolution of animals).”

—–

The opening pages explained that the central concepts underlying racial ideology are hard heredity and racial inequality. Then it claimed that racial inequality has come about because evolution proceeds by struggle. Different races simply do not evolve at the same pace, so they are at different levels. The authors then asserted that the three main human races – European, Mongolian, and Negro – were subspecies that branched off from a common ancestor about 100,000 years ago. They argued that races evolved through selection and elimination, and the Nordic race became superior because it had to struggle in especially harsh conditions. Throughout this pamphlet the terms “higher evolution,” “struggle for existence,” and selection are core concepts that occur repeatedly.

Are you starting to get the picture?

And almost every major biography of Hitler acknowledges the same thing

The standard biographies of Hitler almost all point to the influence of Darwinism on their subject. In Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, Alan Bullock writes: “The basis of Hitler’s political beliefs was a crude Darwinism.” What Hitler found objectionable about Christianity was its rejection of Darwin’s theory: “Its teaching, he declared, was a rebellion against the natural law of selection by struggle and the survival of the fittest.”

John Toland’s Adolf Hitler: The Definitive Biography says this of Hitler’s Second Book published in 1928: “An essential of Hitler’s conclusions in this book was the conviction drawn from Darwin that might makes right.”

In his biography, Hitler: 1889-1936: Hubris, Ian Kershaw explains that “crude social-Darwinism” gave Hitler “his entire political ‘world-view.’ ” Hitler, like lots of other Europeans and Americans of his day, saw Darwinism as offering a total picture of social reality. This view called “social Darwinism” is a logical extension of Darwinian evolutionary theory and was articulated by Darwin himself.

If you talk to most racists today, they will use terms such as “subhuman” or “savages” to describe the groups that they do not like.

The unspoken implication is that those groups are “inferior” because they evolved that way.

Anyone that thinks like that is an idiot.

But perhaps it should not be surprising that people buy into such ridiculous theories since we are getting dumber as a society. In fact, one very prominent evolutionist just came out with two new papers claiming that humans have been getting dumber for thousands of years

Are humans becoming smarter or more stupid? Comparing our modern lives and technology with that of any preceding generation, one might think we are becoming increasingly smarter. But, in two papers published in Trends in Genetics, Gerald R. Crabtree of Stanford University claims that we are losing mental capacity and have been doing so for 2,000–6,000 years! The reason, Crabtree concludes, is due to genetic mutations—which are the backbone of neo-Darwinian evolution.

Professor Crabtree is convinced that this loss of mental capacity is the result of mutations which have accumulated in our genes…

Based on data produced by the 1000 Genomes Project Consortium and two recent papers in Nature, Crabtree estimates in the first article that, in the past 3,000 years (approximately 120 generations), about 5,000 new mutations have occurred in the genes governing our intellectual ability. He claims most of these mutations will have no effect, while about 2–5 percent are deleterious and “a vanishingly small fraction will increase fitness.” Crabtree bases his conclusion that humankind is losing mental capacity on the ratio between the deleterious and the beneficial mutations. (One critic calls this a “back-of-the-envelope calculation;” but if Crabtree’s objective is a reasonable order-of-magnitude estimate, then he seems to have achieved that.)

In the second article, Crabtree moves away from the science of genetics and moves into anthropology, which he admits is “not [his] area of expertise.” He opines that humanity began losing intellectual abilities with the advent of agriculture and permanent communities 3,000 years ago because such a change would “tend to reduce the selective pressure placed on every individual, every day of their life.”

This is actually just more evidence that confirms the theory that I wrote about in my previous article entitled “The Human Race Is Dying: DNA Degeneration Would Eventually Lead To The Total Extinction Of Humanity“. With each passing generation, we lose more DNA information and we accumulate more harmful mutations.

Given long enough, at some point the human race would no longer be able to produce viable offspring.

Of course all of this points to the fact that we were created and that humanity is in a long process of decaying because of sin, but most people today prefer to believe in the fairy tale of evolution even though the hard science simply does not support it.

Sadly, these days many people will believe just about anything. For example, check out all the people that are willing to believe that President John F. Kennedy just died in a car accident

So what do you believe?

Please feel free to share what you think by posting a comment below…

Get my new book about the future of America: The Beginning of the End.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.