Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Atheists, did you know Charles Darwin got his cousin pregnant? [Spirituality & Religion]

Also he had a funeral in a church. Doesn't this fact make him a hypocrite?

And if his [i]theory [/i] of evolution is so good, how come he decided to have a child with his cousin. No sophisticated mammal ever has off spring with close relatives because of (according to Atheist doctrine) a requirement for Survival Of The Fittest. But Darwin, the architect of this 'theory' disregarded all considerations concerning Survival Of The Fittest when he got his cousin pregnant.

All of the above demonstrates the muddled thinking and hypocracy prevalent in modern day Atheism.
HowardP · 80-89, M
You are, of course, a complete ignoramus. Charles Darwin MARRIED his first cousin, Emma Wedgwood, and they had a wonderful marriage, with ten children, seven of whom lived to adulthood, which was a miracle in those days. The children themselves spawned a number of highly successful grandchildren.

First cousin marriage is quite normal, and entirely legal. The only slight risk is if it cascades down through multiple generations, and only then if there is a genetic defect. You are wholly misinformed.

Even if you were right - and you are totally wrong - when Charles Darwin married Emma, he had not formulated the basis for "On the origin of Species" so the consanguinity would not have bothered him.

Darwin was an agnostic, not an atheist. When he died at Down House (gorgeous museum now - you should visit it and learn) he had arranged a simple non-religious burial. But his admirers demanded a state funeral in Westminster Abbey, which the Dean reluctantly organised, on the basis that a christian state funeral was inappropriate for a proclaimed agnostic.

The idea that you demolish a deeply researched and highly proven theory by attacking the man is deplorable. but if you do want to descend to that level, (the gutter) , try and get a tiny portion of your argument based on fact.
HowardP · 80-89, M
@Jm31xxx Please provide some indication of a legal jurisdiction or a mainstream religion that forbids marriage between first cousins. Unless you can, by definition it is not fornication.

Please provide authoritative references from medical geneticists that suggests a single, non-cascading productive marriage between first cousins has any statistically increased risk over random reproduction.

You probably don't have the skills to do proper research, so i will give you the answer.

there isn't any.
Jm31xxx · 41-45, M
@HowardP what does 'none cascading' mean?

Having children increases the risk of many genetic defects and these defects can be quite severe, such as incorrect number of chromosomes, lack of immunity to certain diseases etc.

I dont know why you're pro having children with your cousin.
HowardP · 80-89, M
I normally don't engage with ill-informed morons, as they tend to drag one down to their level, and then beat you on experience. But here goes.

In your confused and inchoate thinking, you tried to somehow confound Charles Darwin by ludicrous misinterpretations of three aspects of his life - a wonderfully happy and fruitful marriage which was entirely unremarkable at the time. Secondly, confusing atheism with agnosticism, and finally pinning on him a post-mortem act of national respect over which he had no control whatsoever and which in no way suggests personal hypocrisy.

Pathetic does not begin to describe what passes for your thought processes.

Your lack of understanding of genetics, consanguinity, and non-cascading reproduction mark you as someone who has a closed mind, and and blind the reality that any thinking person would recognise Charles Darwin as one of the great minds of scientific advancement, even if they disagree with his final conclusions.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Fernie · F
@MalteseFalconPunch eloquently put!
I'm not even close to being an atheist, but Darwin married in 1839, when Gregor Mendel, "the father of modern genetics" was 17 years old.

By the 1880s, only 13 states had laws against cousins marrying and some states didn't pass such laws until the 1940s, more than 100 years after Darwin married his cousin.

Knowledge isn't retroactive.

(Edit: I know Charles Darwin didn't live in the United States. I just used that as a measurement of the knowledge about consanguinity.)
HoraceGreenley · 56-60, M
@Mamapolo2016 Yup...Darwin never knew the mechanism of evolution
Bushranger · 70-79, M
You do know what atheism is, don't you? I'll give you a hint, it doesn't mean believing in evolution, the big bang or any other specific scientific theory. There are theists who believe in evolution, does that make them muddled headed hypocrites? You obviously don't like atheists, but you should really do some reading on the subject before posing.
Harriet03 · 41-45, F
[image deleted]
Harriet03 · 41-45, F
@Fernie You Baking?
Fernie · F
@Harriet03 "shit" no!
Harriet03 · 41-45, F
@Fernie I guessed Not!
Graylight · 51-55, F
First, not true.
[i]https://www.livescience.com/2226-incest-taboo-nature.html[/i]

Secondly, developing a theory of how life evolves on the planet has nothing to do with the personal choices a person makes.
Not all Atheists hail Charles Darwin man... Atheism is just not believing in god not being devout in Darwins theory of evolution
No but his wife is from the Wedgewood family - famous china and tablewhere -
And Abraham got his sister pregnant. So...?
Fernie · F
you support trump too huh
HoraceGreenley · 56-60, M
Dude, WTF???
SatanBurger · 36-40, F
So? Most of the CATHOLIC kings and queens are inbred, true story.
HoraceGreenley · 56-60, M
You are misusing the term Theory

 
Post Comment