Thursday, 21 August 2014

So, apparently we're 'immoral'

For a moment this morning I was outraged and nauseated as I read, over my breakfast cereal, Richard Dawkin's latest contrarian tweet.

In response to a woman who wonders about the ethical dilemma of going ahead with a pregnancy after a Down syndrome diagnosis, Dawkins - seeing no dilemma at all - replies:

Abort it and try again. It would be immoral to bring it into the world if you have the choice.

But then I saw this (from Craig Porter):







































...and now I feel better. Best. Response. Ever. 

Suck on that, Richard Dawkins.

If this is what immoral looks like, then paint me scarlet.

5 comments:

  1. Super brains. So often those 'intellectuals' especially evolutionaries fail or are unable to see the humane side of life. That intrapersonal side. The side that really matters. And that's so sad because this side is beautiful.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Really, Richard Dawkins. What a stupid remark. I don't think I'll be buying anymore of his books (wasn't planning to, mind you).

    ReplyDelete
  3. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux. And I'm fairly sure the brain isn't very good at perceiving it either.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Here's the thing with many academics in positions of power: most of the live in a cocoon. Richard Dawkins has lived such a sheltered life and has been allowed to get away with some of his more bad behavior. Hence he really hasn't thought through this stupid argument that he's making. We are more than the make-up of our chromosomes.

    ReplyDelete
  5. That photo made my day!! Dawkins sucks!

    ReplyDelete

Don't be shy, leave a comment. Your words brighten my day!