Darwinian eugenics? No, it's not. It's official!!!

I've blogged previously about some ID supporters' claim that Darwinism led to eugenics. More properly, since eugenics is selective breeding and since ID supporters like to claim that selective breeding is, in fact, intelligent design, it follows that eugenics is actually applied intelligent design. As it turns out, even Michael Egnor (the Discovery Institute's latest darling) agrees. Writes Egnor:

The experimental selection of "desirable" bacterial variants is bacterial eugenics, using the same empirical principles that eugenicists applied to human breeding. Eugenics is human breeding, and is every bit as much of a misapplication of Darwin’s theory as are Dr. Cartwright’s examples of bacterial breeding.

Maybe, as opposed to what several pro-evolution bloggers say, Egnor isn't such an "egnorant" after all. But then he goes and spoils it all by saying something stupid like:

Modern eugenics arose from a philosophical proposition. The basis for eugenics was philosophical materialism, which denied the inherent dignity and sanctity of every human life. Denial of transcendent ethical standards eventually leaves "because we can" as the sole ethical standard.

Sigh. Even the absense of philosophical materialism (I assume he meant naturalism) can deny any "inherent dignity and sanctity of every human life". The fact that some "supernaturalists" see "inherent dignity and sanctity of every human life" is because of their arbitrary choice of philosophical supermaterialism that see "inherent dignity and sanctity of every human life". And, of course, an arbitrary choice of philosophical materialism can also give "inherent dignity and sanctity of every human life". Point being: there is only "inherent dignity and sanctity of every human life" if you claim that there is.