Charles Darwin's theory of evolution not based on empirical research, but put forth to justify common descent of all humanity

So says a new book on Darwin. Thanks to The White Christ for this find:

Charles Darwin, Abolitionist

By CHRISTOPHER BENFEY
NY Times
Published: January 29, 2009

Charles Darwin, a 22-year-old dropout from medical school who subsequently considered becoming a priest, boarded the Beagle in late 1831 and spent five years on the ship, traveling the world and collecting natural specimens. Despite its cuddly name, the Beagle was a naval brig outfitted with 10 guns. Darwin was a “gentleman dining companion” whose official responsibility was to provide civilized banter with the captain.

Darwin visited Tierra del Fuego, Tahiti and Tasmania, along with other exotic locales, but he never set foot in the United States. Around 1850, charmed by popular tales of lush country­side and the exciting adventures of the Underground Railroad, and still withholding from public view his explosive theory of evolution, he flirted briefly with the idea of moving his large family, with seven children under the age of 11 and another on the way, to Ohio. The middle states, he wrote, are “what I fancy most.”

Two arresting new books, timed to co­incide with Darwin’s 200th birthday, make the case that his epochal achievement in Victorian England can best be under­stood in relation to events — involving neither tortoises nor finches — on the other side of the Atlantic. Both books confront the touchy subject of Darwin and race head on; both conclude that Darwin, despite the pernicious spread of “social Darwinism” (the notion, popularized by Herbert Spencer, that human society progresses through the “survival of the fittest”), was no racist.

Adrian Desmond and James Moore published a highly regarded biography of Darwin in 1991. The argument of their new book, “Darwin’s Sacred Cause,” is bluntly stated in its subtitle: “How a Hatred of Slavery Shaped Darwin’s Views on Human Evolution.” They set out to overturn the widespread view that Darwin was a “tough-minded scientist” who unflinchingly followed the trail of empirical research until it led to the stunning and unavoidable theory of evolution. This narrative, they claim, is precisely backward. “Darwin’s starting point,” they write, “was the abolitionist belief in blood kinship, a ‘common descent’ ” of all human beings.

[...]

Commentary from The White Christ:

It was noted in a comment on this latest column, that Darwin- the ‘arch-enemy of conservative Christians’ and, of course, the friend of the ‘atheist evolutionists’ - was, actually, not a rabid atheist, but was another sort of rabid fool - a died in the wool Abolitionist!

[...]

Darwin, who had to be pushed and prodded by Huxley to get this book in print, wrote ‘Origin’ initially, NOT because he believed in the ‘theory of evolution,’ BUT because he viewed the Black and White races as equal in GOD’s EYES, and wanted to prove it ‘scientifically’!!! HE BELIEVED not IN THE THEORY OF Evolution, but in THE THEORY OF MISCEGENATION as ’survival of the fittest’!

[...]

Darwin, (who wrote Origins to counter the increasing weight of Victorian science- and scientists- that were proving the superiority of the White Man in his: cranial capacity; his IQ; his inventiveness; his altruism and other positive moral traits; his ability in all fields, in short, he SUPERIORITY over the other Races to RULE and REIGN; in short, what eventually became both his blessing and his curse- the so-called ‘White Man’s Burden’ – BOTH existed at the height of the Victorian
era, and Darwin was in an existential pickle. Believing as he did, he felt that the ‘lesser races’ were to be pitied (as only a Better does to his Inferior,
whether of class, station, or race…), and, spineless as he was, Darwin could not reconcile his universalism with his knowledge of Christendom- which had
existed (if at all) because it, and IT ALONE, had been given grace, by long association with Christ, the Church, and the Holy Spirit dwelling with ‘His People’ [Matt. 1:21].

Precisely because Darwin felt that it was wrong of God to choose one race over the other, and thought the lies and heretical stances of the Abolitionists superior to the Almighty, as knowing more than God, (who ‘hath appointed the bounds of their habitations,’ and who long ago, had ‘given this land into your hands, and taken it from the Jebusites, and Perrizites, and Amorites, etc.)

Darwin was saying GOD WAS WRONG in creating a race of slave/servant, and used his sophomoric science to prove ‘racial equality’!!!