If so, then why is it that scientists do not loudly oppose the abortion of fetuses with multiple genetic defects? After all there could be a new forward step in the making. Why does science in practice not support survival of the fittest and oppose vaccination in order that the species may be enhanced. I can only assume it is because when it comes to evolution science speaks out of one side of its mouth but in practice out of the other.
Perhaps because humans, as a species, have evolved enough to care for each other, which ultimately means they have the morality that convinces them that killing other humans for the sake of evolving the human race is not exactly the nicest thing to do. Believing in evolution based on the mountains of evidence doesn't mean you should support the continued evolution of the human race at the cost of other humans' lives, it simply means you understand how life forms became the way they are today based on the information that is available.