Tens of thousands of Americans were sterilized en masse, thus stealing from them the children they would never see—because of deliberate evolutionary practices (see The lies of Lynchburg).
In Australia there is now an even bigger issue involving child-stealing. Government policy, continued till the 1970s, caused some 100,000 children of Australia’s aboriginal people to be taken from their parents into foster homes or institutions, by force if necessary.
Genesis teaches us that the family is a basic created unit—breaking the bond between parent and child is therefore fundamentally wrong. While there are always instances in a fallen world in which removing children from parents is the lesser of two wrongs, this is the exception, not the rule.
Most of these children suffered the effects of this separation for life, although many were well looked after. For too many others, there was physical and sexual abuse. Very few aboriginal families have not been affected in some way.
As Australia wrestles with the implications of the ‘stolen generation’, debates about guilt and compensation rage, with the matter rapidly becoming a political football. Yet one fact, previously documented by the media, has become unmentionable. Namely, that the prime motivator behind this grand-scale policy was evolutionary belief.
Darwin believed that various races, having evolved apart, were at different evolutionary ‘stages’; the Australian Aborigines were living ‘missing links’. Northern hemisphere museums, keen to obtain specimens for evolutionary displays, were not really fussy whether these came from grave-robbing or calculated murder. Men, women and children, who were classified by the Australian National Museum as ‘Australian animals’, were hunted down for the cause of evolutionary ‘science’.1
A half-caste child was automatically ‘more evolved’ than its full-blood parent. Therefore, it was seen as virtuous to remove the child from its ‘less-human’ parent.2 Of course, such children were still regarded as less evolved by most whites.
The evolutionary presumption that Aboriginal mothers, being less human, were less capable of real feelings, comes through in reports of the time, such as the official who wrote: ‘I would not hesitate for one moment to separate a half-caste from an Aboriginal mother, no matter how frantic her momentary grief.’3
Some godly Christians, fully aware of biblical history, and motivated by their belief that all were created in the image of God, were opposed to the government’s evolutionary policies. Many opened their homes to protect such children from being institutionalised and exploited by the ungodly, as well as protecting some from the occasional tribal practice of infanticide of half-castes. These are now receiving unjust criticism for their role.
Some officials saw removal as a way to ensure that aboriginal children receive a proper education. But while permission was always sought from the parents prior to removal of full-blood children, for half-castes it was a different matter. At first, courts had to rule there was parental neglect (not difficult when the criteria included sleeping in the open, a standard tribal practice), but officials soon lobbied for (and obtained) the power to remove all half-castes as ‘neglected’ by definition.
Many churches and church agencies were, sometimes enthusiastically, involved; a high court judge has openly apologised for his role at the time (while a leading official in a mainstream denomination). Then, as now, Christian thinking had been contaminated by the ‘science’ of the day.
If the Bible had been seen as the history book of the universe, it would have been obvious that all people, being descendants of Noah’s family only a few thousand years ago, are closely related. Thus, the ‘scientific’ beliefs about Aborigines had to be wrong, period. (Biologists now agree that the genetic differences between the so-called ‘races’ are utterly trivial—see The fallacy of racism).
For there to be a resurgence of real blessing in our nations, God’s people need to turn, en masse, from their idolatrous compromise with the tenets of pagan evolutionism. Spreading creation truth widely through our circles, perhaps with the help of this publication, is something we can all do.
- D. Monaghan, The Body-Snatchers, The Bulletin, pp. 30–38, 12 November 1991. See also Carl Wieland, Darwin’s Bodysnatchers, Creation 14(2):16–18, March–May 1992.
- Black tears fall, The Advertiser (Adelaide) p. 29, 7 June 1997.
- Ref. 1, p. 38.