From Chapter one of Origin of the Species :

When a race of plants is once pretty well established, the seed-raisers do not pick out the best plants, but merely go over their seed-beds, and pull up the 'rogues,' as they call the plants that deviate from the proper standard. With animals this kind of selection is, in fact, also followed; for hardly any one is so careless as to allow his worst animals to breed.

Naturally, creationists merely quote the last sentence and claim that with this sentence, Darwin was advocating human eugenics.  In fact, Darwin spends the first chapter discussing the demonstrable effect of artificial selection over time in the creation of new breeds to lay the foundation for how changes over time could accumulate into new species, and discussing the difficulties that the previous explanations have in providing a mechanism that can accommodate all observations…on the way to eventually showing how his theory DOES accommodate these observations.

To mistake this sentence in context for anything other than part of a description of how artificial selection is implemented in domestic animal husbandry would require either extreme stupidity or extreme dishonesty.  In creationist apologists, it is difficult to tell the difference. 

Incidentally, the pre-Darwin explanations are the ones currently offered by creationists, with the terminology changed, but with no new information nor alternative mechanisms proposed.  Current evolutionary theory has offered predictions borne out by new discoveries, and has suggested areas for further study that have spawned whole new and fruitful discoveries that have enriched our lives in ways too numerous to list.  The theories that Darwin's replaced withered and died because they could not produce new knowledge.  Creationists who want to resurrect those old ideas have failed to demonstrate any ability of these ideas to provide any advancement of knowledge or understanding.

In the absence of such an ability to produce new information, it is ridiculous for creationists to claim that it is bias and prejudice that keeps their ideas from being accepted in academia.