Why did Darwin teach human female Inferiority? (dare you 2 read the whole Thing)?
Question:
Answer:
wow wasn't darwin a smart guy for realizing there was a HUGE difference between males and females! geez, and einstein though he was good with his theory of relativity. considering i am female and i just graduated from class where the top five were female as well as the fact that women have convinced society that they need to sit down to pee while guys are still standing i would argue darwin in that women seem to be the smarter species to me!
Maybe if you spent less time posting dry Christian rhetoric on AnswersRoom.com, and more time bathing and trying to get some... you'd be a decent person and not have to go crying to god every time something goes wrong in your life or someone says something you don't completely agree with. Power to the Sheeple!
HOLY CRAP THAT'S A LOT!! I'm not readin all of it, but Darwin taught female inferiority for the same reason he taught evolution. He was an idiot, kinda like Pigphucker Jones's Q&A.
Did you type in all that junk or did you just cut and paste the most boring stuff you could find on the web?
You had me at "HELLO"
NOBODY IS GOING TO EVEN READ ALL THIS CRAP!
Post a simply question and leave all the "references, passages and useless info" to your Minister.
Well, it sounds to me like you answered your own question...
This entire posting is a meaningless noise.. If you really are religously minded, forget all this crap and just go find God.
Firstly, it is very bad form to include an advert for any periodical in a question and you risk being reported for this.
Secondly, it is also bad form to copy and paste an entire article into your question; you should include a link to the article instead.
Thirdly, you appear to have made the same mistake that so many fundamentalist religious types have made with regard to the evolution issue, you have formed your opinions on a biased review of Darwin's work rather than reading the work itself.
If you had actually read the Descent of Man you would know that the allegations that Mr Bergman makes in the above passage are entirely fictitious. At no point does Darwin suggest that in terms of morals and intelligence human males and females are anything but equal.
May I suggest that you check your facts in future?
I leave you with a short exert (short in comparison to your question anyway) from the conclusion of The Descent of Man.
"I am aware that the conclusions arrived at in this work will be denounced by some as highly irreligious; but he who denounces them is bound to shew why it is more irreligious to explain the origin of man as a distinct species by descent from some lower form, through the laws of variation and natural selection, than to explain the birth of the individual through the laws of ordinary reproduction. The birth both of the species and of the individual are equally parts of that grand sequence of events, which our minds refuse to accept as the result of blind chance. The understanding revolts at such a conclusion, whether or not we are able to believe that every slight variation of structure,—the union of each pair in marriage,—the dissemination of each seed,—and other such events, have all been ordained for some special purpose." *1
r u jless or what?
You're the one making a naturalistic fallacy, not Darwin. Ah, stupidity.
Social darwinism caused two world wars. Nuff Said.
More Questions & Answers...