He makes a valid point, in that there has been a moral collapse in many Western nations -- the U.S. is not exempt, although in some senses they are better than most.

But as valid as his point is overall, I can't help but cringe at his evocation of "evolution" as the root cause of all this trouble.

Evolution really has nothing to do with it. The various moral/sexual/societal liberalisms that were so voiciferously championed by the generation of the 60s have much more to do with the current problems.

The way in which God saw fit to make man is simply the way in which God saw fit to make man; it is blameless. Man is to blame.

Agreed.

Though the way I read it was a hit on Darwinism and the expolation from his theory of evolution. Which also inspired Margaret Sanger and eugenics. Which of course has brought us the 'pill', abortion mills, and the Holocaust.

All in my opinion interrelated to the theories that Darwin espoused at making man 'less human'.

I'll agree that Darwinism -- although we must be careful when using that term, for it certainly precludes any professional-level discussion of ideology -- in its typical meaning is a terrible thing, but that is because it takes what is nothing more than a reasonable scientific theory (and one quite well supported, at all but the micro-organic level, by reams of evidence) and attempts to apply it to social situations and social policies.

Which, of course, is an absurdity. And which, as you point out, has brought us numerour horrors.

The theory remains blameless; the blame falls squarely on the shoulders of those who twist and contort it to fit situations it cannot be used to describe.

Ken,

Agreed.

Like Adolph Hitler, Jose Luis Rodriquez Zapatero, Margaret Sanger, Karl Marx, Joseph Stalin, Vladimir Lenin, Jacque Chirac, Walter Cronkite, et al.

They all adhere to social Darwinism and have either had terrible consequences or are enacting terrible policies or promoting these terrible policies.