Richard Dawkins, the popular atheist had recently introduced some more of his venomous ideas to an unsuspecting public with the endorsement of eugenics calling it “practical and desirable”. Of Course in his evolutionary atheistic world view that holds humans completely in nature (without a soul or spirit) he can value a human life as equal to that of any living creature such as horses, mosquitos, tuna fish trees ect. Giving this monstrous world view which he operates from it would be only logical to come to the conclusion that the world would benefit from breeding programs like the ones used by the nazi party to create “Super Humans” for specific application.
In a 2006 interview, he expressed some small and timid support fro eugenics by endorses the slightly less shady side of this pseudo-science, that of offering some perceived potential benefit to humanity. By the use of human breeding programs for the purpose of creating humans with mathematical, or musical abilities.
“if you can breed cattle for milk and horses for running speed, and dogs for herding skills, why on earth should it be impossible to breed humans for mathematical,musical, or athletic ability?”
as horrible as it seems to create breeding programs for humans is, in essence creating classes or breeds of people and of-course creating some way to physically separate the two. As horrible as that seems Dawkins is oddly silent about the other darker and inevitable side of eugenics. that of removing the unwanted humans that are not seen as contributing to the advancement of the species or at least the ‘breed’.
When I say that removing the people that are thought of as unwanted is inevitable in eugenics is not only because that is what history has shown us with the Nazi party, but also because in order for the useful ‘superior humans’ to breed superior children the ‘less fit’ MUST be impeded from breeding all together or at least with the ‘useful’ humans in order for the desired genes to develop. Now it should be noted that Dawkins thinks it is child abuse to call a child growing up in a certain faith such as Christianity a Christian, yet he does not see anything wrong with the idea of breeding children with the sole outcome of developing a stronger, smarter, more skilled athlete, musician, or whatever. I wonder what is the means he would use to make sure the child born to especially gifted runners to take up running and not music or painting or whatever that child would want?
Naturally a strong athlete is strong because of training and conditioning not because his/her parents are strong athletes. Dawkins cautiously sidesteps the messy details of his eugenic ideology just to make it seem appealing. in order for the cattle to be bread for milk and horses for speed and dogs for herding we control their environment and behavior. I wonder how this man would like to control these conditions for humans. What is he not disclosing about his ideology in order to get his stronger, faster,smarted, better human?
Is he just testing out the waters to see just how acceptable the idea of eugenics has become more than 60 years after the Nazi party? and if not, if he really would like to see some kind of human breeding program how does he not consider this abuse? after all he thinks even calling a child in a christian family a christian is abuse?
