blastoff
Undocumented Reg. User
Ah, but the Darwin Award lives on!Right off hand, I see no need to ban Charles Darwin from schools and libraries.
He's dead.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ah, but the Darwin Award lives on!Right off hand, I see no need to ban Charles Darwin from schools and libraries.
He's dead.
Oh, so, darwin was a trumpanzee? Link?No clear understanding as to why trumpanzees get labeled racist. It's a puzzlement.That white people are more advanced than blacks?No books should be banned; over time they become historical pieces.Little House on the Prairie, To Kill a Mockingbird, Tom Sawyer, Uncle Toms Cabin.... all racist and offensive according to the Left.
YET:
Darwin and his evolutionary ideas, the awful depiction of Australian Aborigines and people from Africa being closer to apes than light-skinned people, should be immediately banned from schools, libraries, etc.
In the 1900s, public schools students in America were shockingly taught, based on Darwinian evolution (an inherently racist philosophy), that the “Caucasians” were supposedly the “highest” “race.” In this age of political correctness, why is there not outcry about Darwin's books?
BTW, The Origin of Species is the one that still applies today, more or less.
When it came to race issues, Darwin was a product of his era. However, when it came to evolution, he was ahead of his time. The study of evolution is important enough to keep his works in schools and libraries, whereas so-called holy books are the real trash.Little House on the Prairie, To Kill a Mockingbird, Tom Sawyer, Uncle Toms Cabin.... all racist and offensive according to the Left.
YET:
Darwin and his evolutionary ideas, the awful depiction of Australian Aborigines and people from Africa being closer to apes than light-skinned people, should be immediately banned from schools, libraries, etc.
In the 1900s, public schools students in America were shockingly taught, based on Darwinian evolution (an inherently racist philosophy), that the “Caucasians” were supposedly the “highest” “race.” In this age of political correctness, why is there not outcry about Darwin's books?
View attachment 201690 View attachment 201691 View attachment 201692 View attachment 201693
And no one finds saying whites are superior to blacks offensive?Most of the letters I’ve recevied about banning books were concerns over offensive lagnauge or sexually explicit, but there are a whole host of other whiny reason given. These letters come from all over the political spectrum as well.
Product of his era?When it came to race issues, Darwin was a product of his era. However, when it came to evolution, he was ahead of his time. The study of evolution is important enough to keep his works in schools and libraries, whereas so-called holy books are the real trash.Little House on the Prairie, To Kill a Mockingbird, Tom Sawyer, Uncle Toms Cabin.... all racist and offensive according to the Left.
YET:
Darwin and his evolutionary ideas, the awful depiction of Australian Aborigines and people from Africa being closer to apes than light-skinned people, should be immediately banned from schools, libraries, etc.
In the 1900s, public schools students in America were shockingly taught, based on Darwinian evolution (an inherently racist philosophy), that the “Caucasians” were supposedly the “highest” “race.” In this age of political correctness, why is there not outcry about Darwin's books?
View attachment 201690 View attachment 201691 View attachment 201692 View attachment 201693
All book banning is stupid. I was simply answering the question posed in the title.Be patient. Just a little more Republican gerrymandering required.Little House on the Prairie, To Kill a Mockingbird, Tom Sawyer, Uncle Toms Cabin.... all racist and offensive according to the Left.
YET:
Darwin and his evolutionary ideas, the awful depiction of Australian Aborigines and people from Africa being closer to apes than light-skinned people, should be immediately banned from schools, libraries, etc.
In the 1900s, public schools students in America were shockingly taught, based on Darwinian evolution (an inherently racist philosophy), that the “Caucasians” were supposedly the “highest” “race.” In this age of political correctness, why is there not outcry about Darwin's books?
View attachment 201690 View attachment 201691 View attachment 201692 View attachment 201693
A list of books currently banned by the Left in various sites was provided in the OP.
Your attempt to turn this around, fails.
Darwinian evolution (an inherently racist philosophy),]
That’s because you’ve never been in a library nor have ever listened to an instructor.
I've never seen a book by Darwin in a school library. Nor have I ever heard of a school teacher assigning a Darwin book to read.
Little House on the Prairie, To Kill a Mockingbird, Tom Sawyer, Uncle Toms Cabin.... all racist and offensive according to the Left.
YET:
Darwin and his evolutionary ideas, the awful depiction of Australian Aborigines and people from Africa being closer to apes than light-skinned people, should be immediately banned from schools, libraries, etc.
In the 1900s, public schools students in America were shockingly taught, based on Darwinian evolution (an inherently racist philosophy), that the “Caucasians” were supposedly the “highest” “race.” In this age of political correctness, why is there not outcry about Darwin's books?
View attachment 201690 View attachment 201691 View attachment 201692 View attachment 201693
You consider Darwin’s book to be science?Darwinian evolution (an inherently racist philosophy),]
Darwinian evolution- i.e. the first published theory of the scientific theory of evolution is not a philosophy.
Only those who believe in the inherently racist philosophies of the Creationists would think so.
That’s because you’ve never been in a library nor have ever listened to an instructor.
I've never seen a book by Darwin in a school library. Nor have I ever heard of a school teacher assigning a Darwin book to read.
That’s because you’ve never been in a library nor have ever listened to an instructor.
I've never seen a book by Darwin in a school library. Nor have I ever heard of a school teacher assigning a Darwin book to read.
Of course you would.Little House on the Prairie, To Kill a Mockingbird, Tom Sawyer, Uncle Toms Cabin.... all racist and offensive according to the Left.
YET:
Darwin and his evolutionary ideas, the awful depiction of Australian Aborigines and people from Africa being closer to apes than light-skinned people, should be immediately banned from schools, libraries, etc.
In the 1900s, public schools students in America were shockingly taught, based on Darwinian evolution (an inherently racist philosophy), that the “Caucasians” were supposedly the “highest” “race.” In this age of political correctness, why is there not outcry about Darwin's books?
View attachment 201690 View attachment 201691 View attachment 201692 View attachment 201693
I find it fascinating that this is being passed off as a 'racist' statement by Darwin.
You consider Darwin’s book to be science?Darwinian evolution (an inherently racist philosophy),]
Darwinian evolution- i.e. the first published theory of the scientific theory of evolution is not a philosophy.
Only those who believe in the inherently racist philosophies of the Creationists would think so.
Surfing porn does not qualify as library time.That’s because you’ve never been in a library nor have ever listened to an instructor.
I've never seen a book by Darwin in a school library. Nor have I ever heard of a school teacher assigning a Darwin book to read.
I've spent more time in school libraries than you've spent whining about liberals on the internet.
And no one finds saying whites are superior to blacks offensive?Most of the letters I’ve recevied about banning books were concerns over offensive lagnauge or sexually explicit, but there are a whole host of other whiny reason given. These letters come from all over the political spectrum as well.
Like Little House on the Prairie?You consider Darwin’s book to be science?Darwinian evolution (an inherently racist philosophy),]
Darwinian evolution- i.e. the first published theory of the scientific theory of evolution is not a philosophy.
Only those who believe in the inherently racist philosophies of the Creationists would think so.
Darwin's book was certainly the presentation of a scientific theory.
A book is not science. Even a book on physics is not science- it is a book.