You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Richard Dawkins Hero
March 29 2024 2.40pm

Richard Dawkins Hero

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 20 of 22 < 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 >

 

View reborn's Profile reborn 29 Jun 15 9.30am Send a Private Message to reborn Add reborn as a friend

Especially for Mr Dawkins

20130414-214529.jpg Attachment: 20130414-214529.jpg (19.04Kb)

 


My username has nothing to do with my religious beliefs

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 29 Jun 15 10.15am

Quote reborn at 29 Jun 2015 9.30am

Especially for Mr Dawkins

Indeed, and its quite sad, because when he started out he really wasn't, he was a refuter of critics of evolutionary theory, not a self appointed agitator of an atheist movement and provocator of religion.


 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 29 Jun 15 10.23am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Dawkins isn't an arsehole.

I'd just like to say that because the image is annoying.

He at least doesn't try pushing fairy tales onto children as truth. He can prove the information that he pushes.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 29 Jun 15 10.48am

Quote Stirlingsays at 29 Jun 2015 10.23am

Dawkins isn't an arsehole.

I'd just like to say that because the image is annoying.

He at least doesn't try pushing fairy tales onto children as truth. He can prove the information that he pushes.

He is a bit of an arse... But not compared to many.


 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 29 Jun 15 10.51am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Quote jamiemartin721 at 29 Jun 2015 10.48am

Quote Stirlingsays at 29 Jun 2015 10.23am

Dawkins isn't an arsehole.

I'd just like to say that because the image is annoying.

He at least doesn't try pushing fairy tales onto children as truth. He can prove the information that he pushes.

He is a bit of an arse... But not compared to many.



Fair enough.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View reborn's Profile reborn 29 Jun 15 7.36pm Send a Private Message to reborn Add reborn as a friend

Quote Stirlingsays at 29 Jun 2015 10.23am

Dawkins isn't an arsehole.

I'd just like to say that because the image is annoying.

He at least doesn't try pushing fairy tales onto children as truth. He can prove the information that he pushes.

1) He cant actually, much of the Theory of Evolution has blanks filled in with best guess scenarios

2)We clearly base what is an arsehole on different criteria

[Link]

 


My username has nothing to do with my religious beliefs

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View steviebarton's Profile steviebarton Flag Gosberton, Lincolnshire 29 Jun 15 7.57pm Send a Private Message to steviebarton Add steviebarton as a friend

Dawkins is certainly not universally admired in the 'scientific community'; not least because his gift of rational argument has been distorted by his prejudices. He also falls into the trap of believing that all truth = scientific truth, which is a delusion of its own. What he has achieved is to compel Christian academics to review evidence scrupulously, and to avoid sloppy arguments, and for that we should be appreciative.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Ray in Houston's Profile Ray in Houston Flag Houston 29 Jun 15 10.47pm Send a Private Message to Ray in Houston Add Ray in Houston as a friend

The Bible: So Misunderstood It's a Sin
[Link]

The Bible has more than one story of creation; four actually, one involving God fighting a dragon. Many important elements, like the Three Kings, the virgin birth, the ascension, the parable about casting the first stone and David slaying Goliath were all added later. It's been translated, edited, rewritten and re-interpreted countless times.

People who study the Bible - like the person who wrote this non-jusgmental article - know this. People who cherry-pick the Bible for their own devices get pretty badly pantsed by the author.

 


We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 30 Jun 15 9.40am

Quote reborn at 29 Jun 2015 7.36pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 29 Jun 2015 10.23am

Dawkins isn't an arsehole.

I'd just like to say that because the image is annoying.

He at least doesn't try pushing fairy tales onto children as truth. He can prove the information that he pushes.

1) He cant actually, much of the Theory of Evolution has blanks filled in with best guess scenarios

2)We clearly base what is an arsehole on different criteria

[Link]

1) it really hasn't - Of course a best guess scenario, or theory backed by a reasonable argument, is of course more reliable and valid than one that doesn't fit within the existing model and is backed by no evidence other than pointing at holes. Typically people who use the 'evolution can't explain everything' generally don't;
a) Understand evolutionary theory and population genetics.
b) Misunderstand scientific methodology
c) haven't understood the statement and evidence presented.

2) He's not entirely wrong, I disagree with his view in regards to downs syndrome, but its a personal view, and one that isn't entirely without some rational merit. However in relation to many very serious medical and physiological problems he's right. How anyone allows their child to go to term with disorders such as Harlequin-type ichthyosis (for example) is more likely acting out of selfish personal reasons than the well being of their child. Notably in cases of severe downs syndrome, the same applies.

I think its immoral to not consider termination of a pregnancy due to fetal defects, because often people tend to act on a 'there might be a miracle', or otherwise selfish reasons.


 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View reborn's Profile reborn 30 Jun 15 12.53pm Send a Private Message to reborn Add reborn as a friend

So you agree that to have a Downs Syndrome baby is morally wrong Jamie.

Yes or No?

(I know you struggle with short answers)

 


My username has nothing to do with my religious beliefs

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 30 Jun 15 1.17pm

Quote reborn at 30 Jun 2015 12.53pm

So you agree that to have a Downs Syndrome baby is morally wrong Jamie.

Yes or No?

(I know you struggle with short answers)

I think the context is central. You can't reduce moral or ethical questions to a yes or no answer. I'd say yes, but the important part is the bit following (I think its morally questionable to have children, let alone ones with severe disabilities).

Personally I believe having children is morally wrong, and selfish, given the population of the planet is absurdly out of kilter, it can only add to the misery, both of humans and a death sentence to countless other species.

Ultimately we cull or neuter or otherwise control the populations of other species and yet we have spread like a virus across the planet, destroying species, eco-systems and ultimately ourselves, increasingly as resources run low.

The options ultimately, for humanity will be a cull or population birth control or species collapse. of the three, birth control seem the more humane.

So I don't have children. I wouldn't think twice about aborting a fetus, downes or otherwise, truth be told


 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 30 Jun 15 1.19pm

Quote reborn at 30 Jun 2015 12.53pm

So you agree that to have a Downs Syndrome baby is morally wrong Jamie.

Yes or No?

(I know you struggle with short answers)

Short answer, if depends on the severity of the Downs Syndrome and the suffering of the child, I'd guess. I've known people with Downes who lived relatively good lives, and of others who suffered terrible short lives.


 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 20 of 22 < 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Richard Dawkins Hero