<<I am curious how a distortion can be considered logically
compelling or consistent, or how the science of evolution
can be held in any way responsible for a connection to
racism which is based on a distortion.>>
But the point is that it is NOT a distortion. It is NOT a distortion to move
from the premise "all is only material" to the conclusion "power is the only
rule." It is NOT a distortion to move from "only the fittest survive" to "I
define fitness as X, and I am X, therefore I am more fit to survive." Etc.
So far no one has provided a logical argument, from purely materialistic
premises, to refute the above.
<< As has already been pointed out, one
could use this same argument to hold Christianity accountable
for all manner of evils. Is the justification reasonable?>>
No, one cannot make the same argument to hold Christianity accountable. As
pointed out above, the materialist cannot claim a "distortion." He hasn't got
the objective standard to make that measure. The Christian CAN claim a
distortion, can point out where a misplaced justification is unreasonable.
Yes, there are disagreements, but at least there is a shared moral syntax.
<<Oh, BTW Jim. In the paragraph above you are complaining about
your ideas being distorted. Perhaps you could explain to me
exactly why you are complaining about this? I mean, your ideas
do have consequences don't they?>>
Only the good ones, I hope!
Jim