skip to content »

Religious veiws on interracial dating

1: Introduction 2: Nazi Racial Theory (de Gobineau) 3: Houston Stewart Chamberlain 4: Hans Günther 5: Hitler and Mein Kampf 6: Creationist denial 7: Religion in the Third Reich 8: Christian Denial 9: Conclusion Among those who dislike Darwin’s explanation of human beings as the product of evolution a common accusation is that Darwinian thinking has led to horrors such as the Nazi holocaust.For example the American religious commentator Ann Coulter writes: (which is wrong on all the others, not just Hitler).

religious veiws on interracial dating-85religious veiws on interracial dating-13religious veiws on interracial dating-16

This would indeed be an ideology that had some similarities to Darwinism.While the mutability of species, with new species evolving out of distant ancestors, is the central theme of Darwinism, the Nazis found that idea anathema, and placed a heavy emphasis on racial purity and the distinctiveness and separateness of different species.Further, the Nazis found abhorrent the materialist notion that man might be just like other animals, and, from their religious and moralistic perspective, they insisted that man had a spiritual soul.Nor are there any quotes of leading Nazis looking to Darwin or pointing to Darwin as justification — if there were the creationists would likely have found them by now.In short, the association of Nazi doctrine with Darwinism is an outright fabrication by those who wish to discredit Darwinism and the scientific account of the origin of man.The Nazi’s racial theory is straightforwardly traced back to the writings of Arthur de Gobineau (1816–1882), a French aristocrat, novelist and diplomat.

His work on the “Inequality of the Human Races” was published in 1853–1855 (before Darwin’s Origin of Species), and was translated into English in 1856, and into German in 1897, by Ludwig Schemann, a leading proponent of Nazi theory.

The domestic dog, as with other domesticated and farmed species, is partially the product of Darwinian natural selection and partially the product of human artificial selection to produce desired outcomes.

Dawkins is correct to make a distinction between artificial selection — something we’ve known about since the invention of farming — and natural selection, Darwin’s idea explaining the evolution of species over geological timescales. 1: The `branching' pattern of descent produced by Darwinian natural selection and by artificial selection contrasts with Nazi racial ideology of separate creation of distinct races, and the sinfulness of "contaminating" the "God's handiwork" Aryan race by allowing inter-breeding with "lesser" races.“Hitler didn’t apply NATURAL selection to humans.

This ideology shares one thing with Darwinism, namely the possibility of using selective breeding to achieve a desired end, a possibility mankind had known about since the invention of farming, about 12,000 yrs ago.

But in all other respects it is profoundly anti-Darwinian.

Whereas in Darwinian evolution all mankind evolved out of a common monkey-like ancestor, with all human races sharing a common origin in the recent past, in Nazi ideology the different human races were distinct and separate creations.