Major Protestant Organization, The John Templeton Foundation, Is Financing And Funding Eugenics And A Sinister Scientist Who Is Using Aborted Fetuses For Human Experimentation

By Theodore Shoebat and Walid Shoebat

For years this website has been researching the international network of the eugenist elite. In our investigations we have found the interconnections between corporations, the medical institutions, the military industrial complex, and eugenics. But what we have not found out — until now — is a Protestant bridge with this network. We are speaking of the John Templeton Foundation, a major protestant organization that lobbies to expand the merging between Christianity and Darwinism. Our research did not begin with the Templeton Foundation, but rather it was initially on a scientific study group trying to create human life in a laboratory. We were investigating one of the scientists involved, Amander Clarke, and found out that she was part of a research group getting funds from the Templeton Foundation. Curious, we began to inquire more on the foundation to find out that it has interest in both Protestantism and Darwinism. So this became the main focus of our study. But because our investigation began with the scientists trying to play God and make human life, we will begin with them and how the Templeton Foundation is involved in the advancement of evolutionism.

PART 1

PLAYING GOD

Those who are so bent on creating life, are also those who are always focused on destroying it. Hence the very people who advocate for infanticide, are also those who are “researching” for the idea of creating their own human race. Those who want to play God, hate God; the ones who want to be the Creator, hate the creation.

In 2012, Mitinori Saitou was hailed for generating the first artificial germ cells, as we read in a report published by Nature:

“In 2012, stem-cell biologist Mitinori Saitou of Kyoto University in Japan and his collaborators created the first artificial primordial germ cells (PGCs)2. These are specialized cells that emerge during embryonic development and later give rise to sperm or eggs. Saitou made them in a dish, starting with skin cells reprogrammed to an embryonic-like state through iPS-cell technology (see ‘Stem cells: Egg engineers’). They also were able to achieve the same result starting with embryonic stem cells.”

Mitinori Saitou

Two scientists named Azim Surani of the University of Cambridge, and Jacob Hanna of the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot, Israel, years later worked to complete the efforts of Saitou in creating primordial germ cells. To conduct this experiment, Surani and Hanna used the corpses of aborted human fetuses. As the same report recounts:

“The team compared protein markers in their artificial PGCs with those in real PGCs collected from aborted fetuses, and found them to be very similar.”

The goal of Surani and Saitou was to inject these primordial germ cells (or PGCs) into human testes with the hopes that such cells will become sperms and eggs. Saitou gave his own opinion on the research of Surani and Hanna and stated that it was an “interesting finding”, and that the process for creating such cells “is much more clearly defined compared to previous, ambiguous work, and therefore this will be a good foundation for further investigations”.

Azim Surani

 

Jacob Hanna

One of those involved in this experiment was Amander Clarke, an Australian scientist who specializes in “stem cell research.” Clarke is amongst the scientists who, in the name of curing infirmities with stem cells, will use human fetuses for scientific experiments. Clarke took part in one of these studies in 2012 with a team of researchers from the University of California, Los Angeles (or UCLA), in which they traced “the development of early germ cells in human fetuses of between 6 to 20 weeks and analysed when genes were turned on or off.” The report on the study recounts that “The Los Angeles team worked with anonymized samples from aborted fetuses (after consent) from the University of Washington’s Birth Defects Research Laboratory in Seattle.” Here we are led down yet another rabbit hole leading one into the international eugenist network. A title like “Birth Defects Research Laboratory” lets us know exactly the nature of such a place: it is a building where babies, slaughtered because of their ‘defects’ (most children with autism are murdered in the womb) are kept for ‘scientific’ experimentation.

Amander Clarke

But the people lobbying for such a sinister thing as this are not wearing SS uniforms, rather they are ‘scientists’ or reverencers of science. So while this place is one of Darwinism and eugenics, it is masqueraded as a place of ‘innovation.’ Ian A. Glass of the University of Washington, Seattle, praises the Birth Defects Research Laboratory, stating that it “has been the major NIH-funded site for collection and distribution of conceptal tissues.

The availability of viable conceptal organs and tissues has made the Laboratory a unique and critical non-profit resource for biomedical research.” Glass speaks of “capitalizing on the expected enrichment of genetic defects underlying fetal congenital anomalies”. Speaking of “defects” while lobbying for experimenting on the aborted corpses of retarded children is an evidence as to the reality that the eugenics of the 20th century — when terms such as ‘defects’ and the like were used to support genocide and sterilization — never left us, but has only further sophisticated its veil of marketing.

The Seattle Times published a piece lobbying for the fetal tissue storage house, stating that the “Birth Defects Research Laboratory at the University of Washington has for decades been a source of donated fetal tissue important to medical research,” and the article had no moral qualm with the fact that some of the aborted babies in the lab were “donations from a Planned Parenthood clinic in Washington state.” The Seattle Times article revealed further that “the tissues — fetal brain, liver, heart, kidney and other cells — long have been used at Seattle’s top science centers, as well as sites nationwide.”

The Birth Defects Research Laboratory is in fact the oldest fetal-tissue lab in the United States and was founded by Thomas H. Shepard in 1964. One encomium for Shepard says that he was a man who “pioneered the collection and study of fresh human embryos and fetuses in the United States, a process made possible by relatively liberal laws in the State of Washington.”

The use of human flesh, and boasting about how one has “fresh human embryos and fetuses” is truly an exemplification of evil, of the perpetuation of pagan savagery and of the sinister spirit of Darwinism.

Thomas H. Shepard

In a paper authored by Shepard, the butcher describes how “Five hundred fifty-eight fresh human embryos and fetuses were obtained from the universities of Washington and Michigan following spontaneous loss, elective termination, or neonatal death within 2 days of delivery.” Shepard founded the Teratology Society which revolves around “birth defects research.”

Looking at a record produced in 2010 by the Teratology Society (and authored by Shepard) documenting past officers for the society, one can see that they were all high ranking members of either academic, governmental and medical institutions, or major corporations, further evincing how the state, academia, medical industries and corporations are behind the eugenist network that has so much power in the world.

Perusing through the list, one’s attention is caught by several employees for Hoffman-La Roche, a major pharmaceutical company in Switzerland which, not surprisingly, was heavily involved with the Nazis and capitalized on their despotic policies to direct their own slave labor camps for their corporation. One president of the Teratology Society was Richard M. Hoar who, according to the report authored by Shepard, “trained as an anatomist and has worked in the Department of Anatomy at the University of Cincinnati and at Roche Pharmaceuticals.”

So several presidents of a society that worked to experiment on the tissues of aborted fetuses were also part of a company that conducted slave labor camps with the Nazis. This is not to our surprise. The roots of a corporation reflect its present spirit, and such present actions reflect what lies for the future, and that is genocide for the cause of Darwinism. More proof of the state’s support for eugenics is the fact that the National Institute of Health (the NIH), funds the Birth Defects Research Laboratory, as we read in the report from the Seattle Times:

“The UW receives nearly $700,000 a year, including overhead costs, from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to fund the lab, which has a repository of nearly 2,000 fetal samples from 370 individual donors.”

By playing God and striving to create human life, one hates God and brings death.

But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death. (Proverbs 8:36) 

PART 2

THE TEMPLETON FOUNDATION

So, now that we have established that these scientific groups are really part of eugenist circles, lets go back to Amander Clark, the scientist who took part in the study on aborted human embryos for the goal of generating human sperms and eggs. What is unusual is that Amander has received funding from a Protestant organization. And this is when we get into the main focus of this article: the Templeton Foundation.

In November of 2017, Clark and a team of scientists from UCLA were rewarded $1.1 million from the John Templeton Foundation, a Protestant organization that is heavily focused on the study of genetics, but also on the proselytization of Protestantism. The subject of the study that was funded by the Templeton Foundation was “To what extent is our health pre-determined not only by our parents’ health, but going back several generations?”

The question is, why would a Protestant Christian organization fund a scientific team, a leading member of which is involved in experiments on aborted fetuses and lobbying for embryonic stem cell research?

The answer is very simple: the John Templeton Foundation is a lobbyist group that is financing the spread of the heresy of theistic evolution, or the belief that God created Darwinian evolution. In this case, the John Templeton Foundation is lobbying for the merging between Protestant theology and Darwinism. They are currently financing a project to spread theistic Darwinism in Latin America, called Coalición por el Evangelio (the Gospel Coalition), founded by two Calvinists, Tim Keller and D.A. Carson. On the website of the Templeton Foundation there is an article entitled, Strengthening Protestant Theology & Science Engagement in Latin America, which states:

“Coalición por el Evangelio is a ministry to Latin America providing gospel-centered, biblically faithful resources for the Spanish-speaking church. …Our reputation in Latin America provides significant influence among the thinking youth and established leaders. We want to use that influence to shape the thinking of Christian leaders in Latin America in the areas of Christian faith and science. … There is a widespread notion of the incompatibility of faith and science in Latin American culture, which results in a growing division between the sacred and secular.

The goal of this project is to transform current perceptions that science is fundamentally detrimental to faith. We want to show leaders, pastors, and influencers that science can enhance evangelical convictions, complement Christian theology, provide clarity on the God/world relation, and actually strengthen faith.

This project has several outputs that provide a diversity of approaches to penetrate conventional thinking in Latin America.”

Tim Keller

 

D.A. Carson, founder of the Gospel Coalition

This talk of “faith and science” is always targeted to one thing: merging Darwinism with Christianity. There are no Christians who deny gravity, or electricity. When they speak of “science” they really mean Darwinism. Tim Keller, the most famous of the two founders of the Gospel Coalition, is a theistic evolutionist who lobbies for the merging between evolutionism and Christianity.

Keller uses sophistry as his way of explaining his Christian evolutionism. What he does, and this is quite common, is break the belief in evolution into two systems: evolutionary biological processes (or EBP) and the Grand Theory of Evolution (GTE). The first is simply the belief that God created evolution but that evolutionism does not explain everything in the world, while the second view is one that puts evolutionism as the explanation for everything about humanity. What Keller does is argue that one can believe in the “evolutionary biological process” while believing in God as the center of human meaning and morality. In one article that Keller wrote for the BioLogos Foundation — which is funded by the Templeton Foundation — it reads:

“I don’t believe you have to take Genesis 1 as a literal account, and I don’t think that to believe human life came about through EBP [evolutionary biological processes] you necessarily must support evolution as the GTE [grand theory of evolution].”

Keller, in order to twist arms must apply labels to the foreheads of anyone who disagrees and deems Christians who reject evolution as “the anti-scientific religionists” and makes it clear that he believes “in God using EBP.” He also writes: “Belief in evolution can be compatible with a belief in an historical fall and a literal Adam and Eve.”

So, the Templeton Foundation’s support for violent darwinists is of no surprise, since the organization itself backs the merging of Christianity with Darwinism. In a 2015 statement from the Templeton Foundation it says that it gives grants to organizations specifically to teach on Christian evolutionism:

“The grant recipients will produce hundreds of videos, articles, books, lectures, workshops, and websites, greatly increasing the visibility of the evolutionary creation point of view.”

The Templeton Foundation gave $1,929,863 to the BioLogos Foundation, the very organization that published this work by Keller. The Templeton Foundation is essentially financing a whole network of talkers for the purpose of spreading theistic evolution. Since evolutionism states that the death of the “weak” brings life to “the fittest”, then it is not surprising to see the Darwinist Protestant organization, the Templeton Foundation, giving funds to eugenist entities. 

THE TEMPLETON FOUNDATION AND THE PROMOTION OF EUGENICS 

The Templeton Foundation’s support for eugenist organizations can be further seen in its financing for the Epigenetics Literacy Project (ELP) which is ran by Jon Entine, a Jewish American eugenist. The official website for the Templeton Foundation expresses its support for the ELP as a group researching the “course of future human evolution,” and speaks of its financial backing of the organization, stating:

“A small but vocal group of researchers suggests the inheritance of these modifications could even change the course of future human evolution. The Epigenetics Literacy Project (ELP) was launched to provide clear and scientifically rigorous information to educators, journalists, policymakers and the public at large about epigenetics and other related research areas, including the microbiome and endocrine disruption. The online-based ELP resource, supported by an approximately $500,000 grant from the John Templeton Foundation, is dedicated to advancing public knowledge and discourse about this emerging scientific field.”

Jon Entine

That the Templeton Foundation is investing in the “course of future human evolution,” means that this Protestant organization wants to invest in its fantasy of humans evolving beyond what they are. What they really want to see is man evolving into something “above human” or the ubermensch

Jon Entine is a promoter of what he calls “good eugenics,” which he describes as birth control and even abortion, as he himself wrote for his organization, the Genetic Literacy Project:

“We practice eugenics—which merely means ‘good genes’—all the time. Birth control, nonprofit embryo donations, pre-conception DNA screening tests, amniocentesis and even Match.com for baby-desirous singles who “select” potential mates based on targeted qualities, such as income and education, are all forms of eugenics—accepted and even celebrated by society. Abortion, widely supported by libertarians and political liberals, is a form of eugenics.”

Entine claims that he doesn’t want a totalitarian system where eugenics is enforced, but rather a society where eugenics is voluntarily practiced by individuals with the goal of a ‘healthier’ and more ‘fit’ society. But, who is to say that the eugenic mentality in society will not escalate into state law and despotic policy?

Entine’s idea of “good eugenics” without tyranny is an empty statement because his ideal of how eugenics should be conducted already begins with a tyrannical and sinister practice, and that is abortion, which is really infanticide. If this is how “good eugenics” begins — with abortion — then it already has been initiated with an anti-human practice, and thus it contains within it the fullness of Darwinist tyranny, ready to reveal itself once given the green light by the powers that be. If “good eugenics” begins with abortion, then who is to say that it will not end with death camps? For the death camp of the abortion clinic is already in operation. In one article by Entine he writes:

“Modern eugenic aspirations are not about the draconian top-down measures promoted by the Nazis and their ilk. Instead of being driven by a desire to “improve” the species, new eugenics is driven by our personal desire to be as healthy, intelligent and fit as possible—and for the opportunity of our children to be so as well. And that’s not something that should be dismissed lightly.”

If ‘fitness’ and ‘intelligence’ is the aim of man, and this aim can be accomplished through abortion, then how would Entine know that such a “desire to ‘improve’ the species” would not intensify from the tyranny imposed on the unborn to a despotism imposed on the already born? These scammers of souls will say that their idea of eugenics is only limited to individual actions that are voluntarily done, but yet they see these individual actions as being for the greater whole of society.

Thus, there is a collectivist worldview behind this ideology, and so what these insidious people do is only tell you the first step of their incrementalist plan without telling you the totality of their scheme. They will say: ‘We only want positive eugenics in which individuals make their own decisions towards a better, fitter and healthier society.’ But the masses will hear them and, for the most part, not think of it as anything wrong or sinister, because they are not calling for death camps.

But, they are indeed lobbying for abortion, which is murder; for a murderous conspiracy, no matter how much its devisers desire to conceal their full plan, must always begin with a murderous contrivance in order to make the populous conditioned, cold and callous to the fullness of the evil machination which will involve an even more systematic despotism of humanity. The lobbyists for eugenics will say that that they are not like the Nazis because they only want “positive eugenics” and thats that. But everyone knows that a criminal who has been caught will tell half of the reality of his crime to escape the law.

Such people, since they have already revealed their barbarity by lobbying for abortion, have already revealed the fullness of their evil desires. “The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy.” (John 10:10) And the thief will always conceal himself, always preferring not to be seen when he steals, to escape the eyes of the watcher when he commits his evil. He does not fully expose his plan, and when light takes it away from the darkness, like a scammer he will make up a sophism to explain away what has been proven through sight.

They say that want eugenics to be done only by individuals and not by governments, but they will argue that these individual actions are beneficial for the whole of society. So then, what they are saying is that what is good for the individual is also good for the collective, indicating that they do indeed want collective eugenic customs which would, inevitably, be maintained through government policy.

If a Muslim says that he wants women to wear a hijab, does he not want sharia? And if he wants sharia for individuals, does he not want them for society? So, if one wants eugenics to be done by individuals, then he wants it for society; for society is made up of individuals. But the eugenist will not describe the fullness of his intention, and that is to kill, and to destroy.

But since Nazism has never been popular, the eugenist, like Entine, must respond to the question: ‘Is this not Nazism?’

So Entine writes that “Hitler twisted eugenics to serve his political version of ‘survival of the fittest.’” Even if Darwin never promoted death camps, he nonetheless promoted an ideology in which one race is superior to the other, and anytime a supremacist religion — in which people are exalted as innately superior to others and exhorted to an ideal of bringing some kind of ‘order’ to the world — then disorder is always the result.

To say that Hitler “twisted” eugenics is like saying that there is a law to lawlessness, or an order to disorder. If God is not the foundation of human order, then there are no rules, and no man, no matter how famous — even if he is Darwin and he supposedly wants a limit to his madness — can put a limit to disorder.

The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”

    They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds;

    there is none who does good. (Psalm 14:1)

Rousseau taught on the creation of a new society based on nationalism, with a national religion, without Christianity. He never told people to be cannibals or to slaughter people by the hundreds of thousands. But when his ideas influenced the French Revolution, revolutionaries did all sorts of egregious atrocities, such as cannibalism and genocide (such as what happened to the Christians of the Vendée).

A disorderly ideology will be claimed by its pushers to have a moral limit, but disorder only spawns more disorder. Entine is not saying that a particular people need to be massacred, and nor does he say explicitly that one race is superior to another, but he does lobby for eugenics, and makes his favor for abortion clear. This already reveals an evil belief system. Where then is the limit to evil?

Most lobbyists for infanticide will say that they are for abortion, but also for limits on when one can have an abortion. But since they promote an abomination on one level, who are they to put a limit on that evil being extended to another level? People of the ‘pro-choice’ party condemned Kermit Gosnell for murdering babies in his abortion clinic who were over 24 weeks old.

But if he had murdered babies at 24 weeks, then it would have been “legal.” Even if Gosnell remained within “legality,” his practice would have still been within the realm of evil. So, who are these “pro-choice” people to condemn Gosnell when they themselves promote the same evil? They will say that they are for abortion ‘within the womb’ and only within a duration of weeks, but who are they to put a limit on the very evil that they themselves promote? They say that they want abortion to be within the womb. So is their issue location? One murderer says that murder should be done in a certain place. Another murderer says, ‘I will do murder outside of the womb.’ Both lobby for murder, but disagree on location. But yet the same evil is done. One does murder in the dark, where it is unseen, while the other does it in the open.

One tries to put a limit on the other. One lawless person tries to impose law on another lawless person. But there is no limit to lawlessness. Have you ever called an evil person, a lawful person? A good person, a lawless person? No. Because law must always be good. Thus lawlessness, being rooted in evil, will only spawn more evil.  

Its like the Identitarians of Europe. They will say that they are just good nationalists and patriots, and that they are just trying to protect the cultures of their nations. There is nothing wrong with protecting culture (so long as the aspects of the culture one is protecting is in itself good). But when one actually observes the movement itself, one finds that the identitarians use philosophers like Nietzsche, Yukio Mishima and Heidegger, all of whom advocated for insidious beliefs (Nietzsche pushed for eugenics, Heidegger was a Nazi and Mishima a pederastic cannibal and Japanese nationalist). So one can look at the themes that the Identitarians present to market themselves, but if you get passed the marketing and look at their idols, then you will know what gospel they are really preaching.     

To preclude a discussion on the true intentions of these scoundrels, what these inventors of evil things do is then bring up questions and statements, ‘What then is your view on intelligence and genes?’ ‘Don’t you believe that scientists have a right to study genetic levels amongst different races?’ or ‘Your willingness to ignore scientific facts is an indication of your ignorance,’ or ‘Genetic study can help us study diseases that certain demographics tend to suffer with.’

But, truly, we are not here to just point to the themes these scoundrels present (‘race and IQ’), but really what their end goals are. They like to present certain questions as a way to distract from the reality of their agenda: the fixation on race, and the promotion of murderous actions. They will give ‘scientific facts,’ but look at what they promote. They will reference books, statistics and studies. But look at their rotten fruits. If they are willing to promote the destruction of the fruit of the womb, then who is to say that they will not slaughter other fruit and burn the wheat and inundate the earth with the tares of their evil contrivances? Never has more evils been lobbied than under the word “fact.”

The forces who are accelerating the spread of eugenist ideology are possessed by the spirit of antichrist. In the case of Entine, this is further evinced by his devotion to Jewish racialist religion and how he associates it with his fixation on race and genes. He does not see Judaism as a spirituality, but rather as a tribal religion with its focus on blood. Like the Nazis, Entine’s religion is one of blood and soil. In an interview with the neoconservative and eugenist organization, the American Enterprise Institute — one of the lobby groups that pushed for the Iraq War —  Entine said:

“I have always been a non-believer yet have always considered myself Jewish. This may sound discordant to the ear of a Christian, but not to Jews. We are descendants of an ancient tribal religion that is as much ancestral and tied to geography–Israel–as it is based on faith. It’s not unusual to identify as Jewish and yet categorize oneself as an atheist or an agnostic.”                

Notice what he says: that the Jewish religion is “an ancient tribal religion that is as much ancestral and tied to geography–Israel–as it is based on faith.” What is this, but a religion of blood and soil? The very religion that St. John the Baptist was fighting against when he told the Jews: 

“Therefore bear fruits worthy of repentance, and do not think to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I say to you that God is able to raise up children to Abraham from these stones.” (Matthew 3:8-9)

Jews like Entine are not bearing fruits worthy of repentance, but rather they glorify themselves as children of Abraham, fixating on blood and soil. They want to throw out grace and glorify race. They want Israel without their Messiah.

Entine once wrote: “Jewish success is a product of Jewish genes as much as of Jewish moms.” Here you see the exaltation of a race by presenting the “success” of its members as originating in blood. Again, here is the fixation and boasting of race. Entine himself, like the Jews who hated John the Baptist and Christ, despises Christ as a rebel against the religion of blood and soil that so many of the Jews have believed in, writing:

“Today, the Jewish people stand out as unusual for having one of the few ethnic religions in the West. Yet until the ascension of Christianity, it was only one of many tribal religions that melded faith ancestry. Jesus represented a dramatic challenge to the Mosaic traditions that had come to define Judaism. For most Jews of the era, faith was rooted in the dictates of the Bible and the ancestral ties reaching back almost two thousand years. … While the imprint of Judaism could still be found in the genes, Christianity came to be centered in the soul. it is a momentous fracturing of the tradition of tribal ancestry as the defining component of Jewishness.”

Entine embraces his racialist religion, and thus sees Christ as an enemy to his ideology. He does not say this outright, but such sentiments are obvious. If you see Judaism as a religion of blood and soil as opposed to a spirituality, then you would, expectedly, see Christ as an affront to your worldview.

The Genetic Literacy Project, which is headed by Entine, has also been funded by the Protestant Templeton Foundation, as the organization itself says: “…the Genetics Literacy Project, which first received funding from the [Templeton] Foundation in 2012 and where Entine also serves as executive director.” The Genetic Literacy Project promotes eugenics through genetic engineering on embryos. The Genetic Literacy Project published a piece entitled, Should we strive to engineer better humans? The article then describes a procedure in which embryos are fertilized and the one with the ‘desired’ genes is selected while the ones with the ‘undesired’ genes are thrown out. As the article reads:

“One such intervention that has gained the attention of existential-risk scholars is iterated embryo selection. This process involves collecting embryonic stem cells from donor embryos, then making the stem cells differentiate into sperm and ovum (egg) cells. When a sperm and ovum combine during fertilization, the result is a single cell with a full set of genes, called the zygote. Scientists could then select the zygotes with the most desirable genomes and discard the rest.

The result would be rapid increases in IQ, a kind of eugenics but without the profoundly immoral consequences of violating people’s autonomy.… More broadly, it seems plausible to say that a smarter overall population would increase humanity’s ability to solve a wide range of global problems.”

We are pretty sure that if someone is promoting the murder of babies for ‘increasing human IQ’ in the cause of eugenics, that it is to safe to say that this is Nazism.

Of course, abortion is a form of eugenics, but what Entine is doing is promoting really what is infanticide as “good” eugenics.

But there is no “good eugenics” — for eugenics is based on Darwinism, and Darwinism is about superiority coming about through death; through the “inferior” or “the weak” being naturally selected out of existence for the triumph of “the fittest.”

“But let our strength be our norm of righteousness;

for weakness proves itself useless.” (Wisdom 2:11-12)

These are the words of the wicked; these are the words of Antichrist, which the entities of darkness that lie here on earth, are ushering in. Here we see how the international eugenist network does not only consist of corporations, medical and scientific institutions, but religious figures as well. Academics push eugenics with sophistical and complicated jargon, but the lobbyists for Darwinism will also use religious groups to as well advocate and finance Darwinism.    

print

CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO KEEP THIS WEBSITE GOING