I know there will be some that think the argument for evolution is strictly scientific but I see strange things once you start to connect the dots.
There will always be some who think that science is strictly scientific.
Evolution has no effect on my religious beliefs, and neither has gravity.
I personally believe that evolution and general relativity are of equal importance as scientific theories. But arguments about evolution seem to attract more loonies, probably because relativity is even harder to understand and because there exist for evolution many made-up "simplifcations" (read: lies) that are easy targets for the anti-science crowd.
Evolution is actually quite easy to understand once one gets over this one-species-into-another thing. Animal species do not evolve into other species. (In the same way languages do not evolve into other languages.) Instead species (like languages) fork into two or ultimately more species (or languages). However, the anti-science crowd are not interested in understanding evolution, preferring to explain what they don't understand as faith. This is why every article about Creationism talks about an "evolution" which apparently denies the existence of a G-d, contains the Big Bang, explains the start of life, and turns animals from one species into another.
If anybody were to come up with a new theory that could supersece evolution, one might assume that he would at least be able to explain how evolution works without misrepresenting it completely. And I am sure that will be the case once a better theory comes along.
None of this has anything to do with the Nazis. Evolution denies the concept of a "master race" because such a concept contradicts the survival of the fittest. A dogmatic definition of species X being the "best" contradicts the claims of Darwinism which states that those species will survive that are adapted best to a situation. There is no room for dogmatic definitions in Darwinism. Pershaps ironically evolution proved the Nazis wrong when it turned out that the German "master race" was not the fittest species and Germany lost the war. The Nazis lost and evolution won. Evolution always wins.
Survival of the fittest was supposed to mean that people of good stock would survive as the lower forms of human life faded. If this sounds like something you may have heard before you have.
Yes, it sounds like something I have heard. But it's not "survival of the fittest" as defined by Darwin. Darwinism doesn't believe in "good stock" and acccording to Darwinism humanity is not a higher form of life than cockroaches. (Both humanity and coackroaches can be the "fittest" depending on circumstances.) Racism contradicts Darwinism because it makes the claim that some species (or races) are inherently better than others. Darwinism claims the opposite, that no species (or race) is inherently better and it is not the "best" who survive, but the fittest (to a situation).
Using arguments against racism as arguments against evolution is just as clever as using arguments against one-species-changing-into-another against evolution. Both are effective because some people don't understand evolution and believe anything they are told, and both are wrong as they are arguments against positions that Darwinism denies.
You can argue that there no "master race", but it won't affect Darwinism which also denies the existence of inherently better races.
And you can argue that there is a "species border", but it won't affect Darwinism which describes how one species turns into two without ever crossing or knowing of a "species border".
Master race and species border are two concepts that Darwinism denies, yet some people think that arguing against those concepts constitutes arguing against Darwinism. It's weird and I don't think it can happen to people who have read Dawkins.
If you don't understand how species branch into two, you cannot understand evolution. And once you understand how species branch into two, there is no way the concept of a "species border" will ever seem relevant to you again.
But none of that has anything to do with religion.