Origin of Life
ENAZ

Darwinism and Moral Collapse

Social Darwinism Attaches No Value to Human Life

Reading time: ~9 min read

The graph below shows the enormous rise in crime levels over the last 30 years. The more societies distance themselves from religious moral values, the greater
The graph below shows the enormous rise in crime levels over the last 30 years. The more societies distance themselves from religious moral values, the greater the ensuing moral collapse and crime levels.

When Darwinism's dogma of the "struggle for life" and its mistaken views are put into practice, human life is rendered worthless. Killing people for any reason whatsoever, abandoning them to starvation, provoking war, slaughter, carrying out acts of terrorism, and exterminating people for being mentally or physically handicapped or belonging to a different race all become "legitimate."

In line with this twisted mentality, one who attaches no value to human life is the American professor E. A. Ross. According to Ross's Social Darwinist view: "The Christian cult of charity as a means of grace has formed a shelter under which idiots and cretins have crept and bred." Again according to Ross: "The state gathers the deaf mutes into its sheltering arm, and a race of deaf mutes is in process of formation." Since these actions obstruct so-called natural evolutionary development, he declared that the shortest way to better this world was to leave all such people on their own to be eventually eliminated through natural selection.176

What a ruthless view this is! Man is possessed of a conscience, and conscience commands one to protect the weak, the down-and-out and the poor. Otherwise, if man loses his ability "to think like a human being," then he really will achieve a position inferior to that of animals—because animals show great solidarity and cooperation.

Ross is not the only Social Darwinist to place scant value on human life. A great many share his terrifying ideas. For example, the evolutionist Peter Singer, Princeton University's professor of bioethics, goes so far as to say that people with severe physical handicaps must be regarded as unworthy of life. He expressed this cruel opinion in the following terms:

According to the Darwinist mindset, which regards man as a species of animal, humans are of little worth. Under Social Darwinist logic, nothing must be done to
According to the Darwinist mindset, which regards man as a species of animal, humans are of little worth. Under Social Darwinist logic, nothing must be done to help people who are suffering in pain and fear; and such people are abandoned without help or protection. However, under Islamic moral values, every believer is responsible for striving to ensure others' peace, security and well-being.

If we compare a severely defective human infant with ... a dog or a pig, for example, we will often find the nonhuman to have superior capacities... Only the fact that the defective infant is a member of the species Homo sapiens leads it to be treated differently from the dog or pig. Species alone, however, is not morally relevant...177

Singer went even further and said that the mentally handicapped might be killed in scientific experiments or even for food purposes! Singer's exact words are:

Mental defectives do not have a right to life, and therefore might be killed for food – if we should develop a taste for human flesh – or for the purpose of scientific experimentation.178

Even such revolting and savage behavior can be supported in Darwinist logic. Joseph Fletcher, former president of the Right to Die Society, makes a similar claim regarding the mentally handicapped:

Humans without some minimum of intelligence or mental capacity are not persons, no matter how many of their organs are active, no matter how spontaneous their living processes ... [Idiots] are not, never were, and never will be in any degree responsible. Idiots, that is to say, are not human.179

There are only grounds against those who wrong people and act as tyrants in the Earth without any right to do so. Such people will have a painful punishment. (S
There are only grounds against those who wrong people and act as tyrants in the Earth without any right to do so. Such people will have a painful punishment. (Surat ash-Shura, 42)

The killing of newborn babies is yet another practice condoned by Darwinism, which attaches no value to human life. Darwinism condones such an unconscionable idea: If looking after a newborn poses a hardship for the parents that will hold them back in their struggle for survival, then in evolutionary terms, that baby should be killed. Darwin claimed that animals were frequently observed to kill their newborn, and that this was an important factor in population control. In an article in Science magazine, the evolutionist Barbara Burke has this to say:

Among some animal species, then, infant killing appears to be a natural practice. Could it be natural for humans, too, a trait inherited from our primate ancestors? ... Charles Darwin noted in The Descent of Man that infanticide has been "probably the most important of all checks" on population growth throughout most human history.180

As we have seen earlier, Darwinists like Haeckel encouraged suicide and claimed that those who thought life was unbearable had the right to put an end to it. Yet God has made the taking of one's own life a sin.

All these savage practices and beliefs—eugenics, euthanasia and racism—show how Darwinism is an ideology that attaches no value to human life, and is constructed on myths of no scientific value.

The fact is that the life of every single human being is of great importance. Under Qur'anic moral values, people regard each other as valuable and important, and sacrifice for one another. A believer will give food to someone else, even if he needs it himself:

They give food, despite their love for it, to the poor and orphans and captives. (Surat al-Insan, 8)

Muslims are charged with protecting the poor, helping the abandoned and protecting orphans, helpless women and men, children and the elderly. In one verse, for example, God has commanded people not even to say"Ugh!" to their parents (Surat al-Isra', 23) and always to "say the best" to one another (Surat al-Isra', 53). In another verse, God reveals: "... if someone kills another person—unless it is in retaliation for someone else or for causing corruption in the Earth—it is as if he had murdered all humanity. And if anyone gives life to another person, it is as if he had given life to all humanity." (Surat al-Ma'ida, 32)

It's a manifest truth that a society where everyone regards every human being as having reason and conscience, as valuable and important will be filled with peace, security, love and respect.

References

  1. Thomas F. Gossett, Race: The History of an Idea in America, Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963, p. 170. ↩
  2. Peter Singer, "Sanctity of Life or Quality of Life?, Pediatrics, July 1983, pp. 128-129. ↩
  3. Martin Mawyer, "Death Act Dies in California," Fundamentalist Journal, June 7, 1988, p. 61. ↩
  4. Ibid. ↩
  5. Barbara Burke, "Infanticide," Science 84, May 1984, p. 29. ↩